HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 09/20/1983 EDEN PRAIRIE
• CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
TL AY, SEPTEMBER 20, 1983 7:30 PM, CITY HALL
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang Penzel, Richard Anderson, George
Bentley, Paul Redpath and George Tangen
CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie; City Attorney
Roger Pauly; Finance Director John Frane;
Planning Director Chris Enger; Director of
Community Services Robert Lambert; Director
of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, and Recording
Secretary Karen Michael
•
INVOCATION: Councilman Paul Redpath
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
•
II. MINUTES •
A. Regular City Council Meeting held Tuesday, September 6, 1983 Page 1987
B. Special City Council Meeting held Tuesday, September 13, 1983 Page 1996
Iii. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Request to accept bids for mechanical and electrical work at Cummins- Page 1999
Grill Homestead
B. Request to prepare plans and specifications and secure quotes for Page 2000
exterior restoration work on the Cummins-Grill Homestead
C. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 37-83. amending City Code Section 11.70, Page 2001
Subd. 2., 6., to redefine directional signs for churches and to adopt a
definition for directional signs for schools and publicly owned land
or buildings
D. Clerk's License List Page 2005
E. Final Plat approval for Creekview Estates 2nd Addition (Resolution No. Page 2006
83-222)
F. Final approval for Municipal Industrial Development Bonds in the amount Page 2008
-a-3100,000.00 for Cotton-Hagen (Resolution No. 83-230)
G. Change Order Number 1, Lorence 1st and 2nd Addition Improvements, Page 2009
f.CC. 52-032
H. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 38-83, Zoning from R1-13.5 to R1-9.5 for Page 2010
Ridgewood West 2nd/Westover by Centex Corporation, Approval of Developer's
Agreement, Adoption of Resolution No. 83-217 Approving Summary of Ordinance
No. 38-83, and Ordering the Publication of Said Summary of Ridgewood
West 2nd/Westover. 83 Lots at Cumberland Road and Mitchell Road.
City Council Agenda - 2 - Tues.,September 20, 1983
I. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 43-83, Zoning from Rural to Highway Commercial Page 2011
and Adoption of Resolution No. 83-218, Approving Site Plan for Burger King
Restaurant. County Road 4 and Highway 5.
J. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 42-83, Zoning Amendment to I-2 for E. A. Sween,
Approval of Developer's Agreement Amendment, and Adoption of Resolution Page 2016
No. B3-219, Approving Summary of Ordinance No. 43-B3 and Ordering Publication
of Said Summary. South of State Highway 5 at Fuller Road.
K. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 40-83, Zoning from Rural to Commercial Regional
Service and Adoption of Resolution No. 83-220, Approving Site Plan for Page 2017
Menard's Shopping Center. East of existing Menard's Building; adjacent
to Plaza Drive.
•
L. Preliminary Plat approval for TARGET (Resolution No. 83-224) Page 2019
M. Round Lake Park Irrigation Extension Page 2024
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. ANDERSON LAKES PARKWAY FEASIBILITY REPORT, I.C. 52-032 (Resolution No. Page 202B
83-223) Continued from July 19, 1983.
B. REQUEST FROM SCOTT AND STEPHANIE FELDMANN for Council review of Board of Page 1919
Appeals & Adjustments decision on Variance No. 83-23 (Continued from
September 6, 1983)
( C. PRESERVE MANOR HOMES by Quality Homes. Request for Comprehensive Guide Page 2029
Plan Amendment from Church to Medium Density Residential, Planned Unit
Development Amendment and District Review, Zoning District Change from
Rural to RM 2.5, and Preliminary Plat for four B-plex condominium buildings,
32 units, on 4.0 acres. Location: Northeast quadrant of Center Way and
Anderson Lakes Parkway. (Resolution No. 83-225 - Guide Plan Amendment;
Resolution No. B3-226 - PUD Amendment; Ordinance No. 44-83 - Zoning; and
Resolution No. 83-227 - Preliminary Plat)
D. MONTESSORI SCHOOL by Ryan Development/Hustad Development. Request for Page 2038
Zoning from Regional Commercial to Regional Commercial Service and
Preliminary Plat of 0.75 acre for day care facility. Location: County
Road 60 and Market Place Drive. (Ordinance No. 45-83 - Zoning; and
Resolution No. 83-228 - Preliminary Plat)
E. 1983 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT HEARING (Resolution No. 83-208)
F. CABLE T.V. RATE CHANGE (Res.No.83-231 - Accepting Findings of Southwest Page 2044
Suburban Cable Commission; Ord. No.46-83 - Rate Changes)Page 2045
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 9650 - 9860
VI. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS •
A. Request from NSP for conversion of street lights to high pressure sodium Page 2051
City Council Agenda - 3 - Tues.,September 20, 1983
VIII. ORDINANCES & RESDLUTIDNS
A. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 35-83, Zoning from Rural to R1-13.5 for High Page 1897
Trail Estates 2nd Addition for Countryside Investments, Inc., Approval
oi•Developer's Agreement for High Trail Estates 2nd Addition, any Adoption
of Resolution No. 83-207, Approving Summary of Ordinance No. 35-83, and
Ordering the Publication of Said Summary of High Trail Estates 2nd
Addition. 21 Lots at 6451 Duck Lake Road. (Continued from 9/6/83)
B. Final Plat approval for High Trail Estates 2nd Addition (Resolution No. Page 19D6
83-212) Continued from 9/6/83
C. 2nd Reading of Drdinance No. 41-83, Zoning from Rural to R1-9.5 for Timber Page 2053
Creek by B-T Land, Approval of Developer's Agreement for Timber Creek,
and Adoption of Resolution No. 83-222, Approving Summary of Ordinance
No. 41-83, and Ordering Publication of Said Summary for Timber Creek.
158 Lots at County Road 4 and Duck Lake Trail.
IX. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BDARDS & CDMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council Members
B. Report of City Manager
C. Report of City Attorney
( X. NEW BUSINESS
XI. ADJOURNMENT. .
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 19B3 7:30 PM, CITY HALL
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang H, Penzel, Richard Anderson, Georcc
Bentley, Paul Redpath and George Tangen
CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, City Attorney Roger
Pauly, Finance Director John D. Frane, Planning
Director Chris Enger, Director of Public Works
Eugene A. Dietz and Recording Secretary Karen
Michael
INVOCATION: Mayor Wolfgang H. Penzel
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: Councilman George Bentley was absent
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
Item III. B. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 35-B3, zoning from Rural to R1-13.5
for High Trails Estates 2nd Addition for Countryside Investments. Inc.. approval
of Developer's Agreement for High Trails Estates 2nd Addition, and adoption of
( Resolution No. 83-207, approvina summary of'Ordinance Na. 35-83, and or eying
the publication of said summary of High Trails Estates 2nd Addition, and item
III. C. Final Plat approval for High Trails Estates 2nd Addition (Resolution No.
83-212) were removed from the Agenda and continued for two weeks.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to approve the Agenda and Other
Items of Business as amended (deletions as noted) and published. Motion
carried unanimously.
II. MINUTES
A. Minutes of the City Council Meeting held Tuesday, August 2, 19B3
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Tangen, to approve the Minutes of
the City Council Meeting held Tuesday, August 2, 19B3, as published.
Motion carried unanimously,
B. Minutes of the City Council Meeting held Tuesday, August 16, 19B3
Page 4, para. 2, line 6: change "deleated" to "deleted"
Page 5, para. 9, last line: change "what had" to "that might have"
Page 6. para. 11, line 2: change "permissable" to "permissible"
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Minutes of
the City Council Meeting held Tuesday, August 16, 19B3, as amended and
published. Motion carried unanimously,
�ac�
City Council Minutes -2- September 6, 1983
III. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Change Order Number 1, Lavonne Industrial Park, I.C. 52-048
B. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 35-83, zoning from Rural to R1-13.5 for Hiah
Trails Estates 2nd Addition for Countryside Investments, Inc., approval of
Developer's Agreement for High Trails Estates 2nd Addition, and adoption of
Resolution No. 83-207, approving summary of Ordinance No. 35-83, and ordering
the publication of said summary of High Trails Estates 2nd Addition. 21 lots
at 6451 Duck Lake Road. Removed from the Agenda and continued for two weeks.
C. Final Plat approval for High Trails Estates 2nd Addition (Resolution No.
83-212). Removed from the Agenda and continued for two weeks,
D. Final Plat approval for Hidden Glen (Resolution No. 83-213)
E. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No, 39-83, zoning from Rural to Office for 'CRC by
Ryan Construction Company, and approval of Resolution No. 83-206, approving
development. 21,000 square feet of office on 1.5 acres at City West Parkway
in City West Planned Unit Development.
F. Approval of Amendment to Developer's Agreement for Shady Oak 5th Addition by
MN-TX
G. Clerk's License List
H. Final approval for Municipal Industrial Development Bonds in the amount of
S3,950,000.00 for Shady View Business Center (Resolution No. 83-214)
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to approve items A, D - H on
the Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously,
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. REQUEST FROM SCOTT AND STEPHANIE FELDMANN for Council review of Board of
Appeals & Adjustments decision on Variance No. 83-23
City Manager Jullie stated notice of this Public Hearing had been published
and property owners within the affected area had been informed. Jullie re-
viewed action taken by the Board of Appeals & Adjustments and noted the
provision in the City Code from which the Feldmann's appeal was taken,
Scott Feldmann, 18865 Pheasant Circle, stated the reasons for the request;
he also reviewed the objections voiced by the Cronks and addressed the issues
raised by those objections.
David Cronk, 18895 Pheasant Circle, said he felt the Ordinance was a good
one and spoke to the reasons the request should be denied.
Penzel noted that because there are 55 other cases in Hidden Ponds where
the driveway return is closer than ten feet to the lot line and this condition
exists because of a misinterpretation by Staff, does not mean that this
practice should be continued. He asked City Attorney Pauly about the issue
that a precedent may have been set.
City Council Minutes -3- September 6, 1983
Pauly said it is fairly clear that the past practice or history of
violations does not compel a result that the violations can continue.
The City Council does not have to take that as a binding precedent. A
history of non observance of certain provisions doesn't compel that a
variance be granted.
Redpath asked if the land exchange which had been referred to in the
materials distributed to the Council had been explored further. Feldmann
said Cronks had submitted a proposal to them in July which the Feldmanns
had countered and which had finally been rejected by the Cronks on Monday.
Feldmann noted the proposal had been based on the fair market value of
the 350 square feet of land which the Cronks would gain, the Cronks would
have assummed the cost for resurveying the land and replatting and the
fees incurred. Cronk said the survey fees were going to be $800 - $1000
and they felt this should be a shared cost. Feldmann said the fair market
value for the property would be in the vicinity of $400. Redpath said he
would like to see the parties go back and work on a solution to this problem.
Fred Koppelman, 18890 Deerfield Trail, said his backyard backs up to the
backyards of Cronk and Feldmann, He said he has tried to'determine who would
be the least inconvenienced by the variance request, He said he thinks that
the driveway should be left as it is and the variance should be granted.
Gary Thoreson, 18920 Pheasant Circle, said he felt that the layout of the
subdivision does not meet the intent of the Ordinance. He said if the vari-
ance is not issued it will not be fair to those who have the remaining unbuilt
lots; the other residents of the subdivision have had the opportunity to
place their driveways where they have desired.
Gary Nelson, 18129 Valley View Road, builder, said he was unaware of the
Ordinance and had spoken with a black-topper who has done many of the drive-
ways in the area and he, too, was unaware of any such ordinance either in
Eden Prairie or any of the other suburbs in which he works, He said this
is not an appropriate ordinance when applied to cul-de-sacs,
Cronk said he did not feel is was such a great hardship to comply with this
Ordinance; he again stated he thought the Ordinance was a good one.
Penzel asked what might be the conditions under which the variance could be
granted, Pauly said, according to the statute, the purpose is to provide
variances from the literal provisions of an ordinance in instances
where their strict enforcement would create undue hardship because of circum-
stances unique to individual property under consideration and to grant
variances when it is demonstrated that such action would be in keeping with
the spirit and intent of the ordinance. He noted that undue hardship as
used with the granting of a variance means that the property in question
cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under circumstances allowed by
the official controls.
City Council Minutes -4- September 6, 1983
Redpath again stated he would like to see the two property owners
attempt to settle this problem. Tangen said he would find it difficult
to approve the variance because he does not feel undue hardship has been
demonstrated. He said he felt granting of variances should be limited.
Tangen noted it might be proper to continue this matter and allow the
residents time to work things out. Anderson said he lives on a cul-de-
sac and understands the problems they pose. He said he concurs with
Tangen and Redpath and would like to see the neighbors work out their
problem. Penzel concurred.
Feldmann said since it appeared that the variance would not be granted,
he wished to have the matter continued.
MOTION: Redpath moved,seconded by Tangen, to continue the Public Hearing
to September 20, 1983, to allow the parties additional time to negotiate.
Motion carried unanimously.
B. BURGER KING RESTAURANT. Request for zoning district change from Community
Commercial to Highway Commercial for a restaurant. Location: southeast
quadrant of State Highway #5 and County Road #4. (Ordinance No. 43-83 -
zoning district change)
City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing had been published
and property owners within the project vicinity had been notified.
Dave Sellergren, attorney with Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren, spoke
to the proposal. Also present were Dennis Trissler, Burger King project
development engineer, Jim Benshoof, traffic consultant, Jim Nunn, regional
construction manager, Larry Gadola, director of development, Jay Van Velzen,
area operations manager and David Pauly, district operations manager.
Planning Director Enger stated the Planning Commission had reviewed this
request at its meeting on August 8, 1983, at which time it voted to recommend
approval (4-1-0) subject to the recommendations included in the Staff report
of August 5, 1983,and the additions and amendments as noted in the Minutes
of the August 8th meeting, Enger noted this item will be reviewed by the
Board of Appeals & Adjustments at its meeting on September 8, 1983, as
a variance on exterior materials has been requested.
Redpath asked what the possibility will be for a frontage road along TH 5.
Enger said it is not likely that one would be built on the south side of
TH 5 but more likely on the north side. All individual driveway accesses
would be eliminated and would be consolidated instead.
Penzel asked if there were any right-of-way dedications being made in con-
junction with this proposal, Enger said some had been made in the past, but
he did not contemplate any now. Enger noted that Hennepin County has studied
this and feels there is adequate right-of-way.
Redpath asked if there would be a median break extended to Terrey Pine Drive.
Enger said if one were to be built it would still allow for turns onto and
from Terrey Pine Drive both east and west of C.S.A.H. 4,
There were no comments from the audience,
199U
City Council Minutes -5- September 6, 1983
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Redpath, to close the Public Hearing
and to give 1st Reading to Ordinance No. 43-83, zoning. Motion carried
unanimously.
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Redpath, to direct Staff to draft
a Developer's Agreement taking into consideration the recommendations
included in the Staff Report dated August 5, 1983, (with the exception of
1. f.) as well as the recommendations of the Planning Commission. Motion
carried unanimously.
Penzel requested that the radius of the right-out driveway be further
looked at to preclude someone backing into the parking lot. Benshoof
said this is the standard which was requested by Mn/DOT and is Mn/DOT's
• standard design. Benshoof said he would look into the matter. Penzel
asked City Staff to do likewise.
C. VACATION OF UTILITY EASEMENT: Lot 4, Block 1, Prairie East 4th Addition
(Resolution No. 83-209)
Eric Anderson, property owner, asked for clarification as to what
this action would accomplish. Penzel noted the easement would be removed
since it was no longer necessary. Director of Public Works Dietz concurred
and explained why this was necessary.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to close the Public Hearing
and to adopt Resolution No. 83-209, vacating the utility easement, Lot
4, Block 1, Prairie East 4th Addition. Motion carried unanimously.
D. VACATION OF UTILITY EASEMENT: Lot 8, Block 1, Edenvale 14th Addition
(Resolution No. 83-210)
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the Public Hearing
and to adopt Resolution No. 83-210, vacating the utility easement, Lot
8, Block 1, Edenvale 14th Addition. Motion carried unanimously.
E. VACATION OF UTILITY EASEMENT: Lot 2, Block 3, Creekview Estates
(Resolution No. 83-211)
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to close the Public Hearing
and to adopt Resolution No. 83-211, vacating the utility easement, Lot
2, Block 3, Creekview Estates. Motion carried unanimously.
F. REQUEST FOR LIQUOR LICENSE FOR FIDDLER'S DELI
City Manager Jullie said notice of this Public Hearing had been published
and a positive recommendation had been received from the Public Safety
Department.
Jerry Milenberg, Eagan, area supervisor for the Fiddler's Deli, was
present to answer questions.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to close the Public Hearing
and to grant the request for a liquor license for Fiddler's Deli. Motion
carried unanimously.
199I
September 6, 1983
City Council Minutes -6- 5e P
V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS NOS. 9310 - 9649
MOTION: Tangen moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Payment of
Claims Nos. 9310 - 9649. Roll call vote: Anderson, Redpath, Tangen and
Penzel.voted "aye." Motion carried unanimously.
VI. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
There were no reports.
VII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS j.
A. TIM8ER 8AY MANOR HOMES by Richard Miller Homes, Inc. Request for preliminary
plat of 14.8 acres into eight (8) lots. Location: Timber Lakes Drive and
County Road 4 (Resolution No. 83-215 - preliminary plat)
Jim Carver, Richard Miller Homes, addressed the request.
Planning Oirector Enger said the Planning Commission had reviewed this
request at its meeting on July 25, 1983, at which time it continued the
discussion to August 8, 1983, to allow the proponent time to prepare a
landscaping plan which would buffer the proposal from the exisiting single
family homes. At the August 8th meeting action was continued to August
22 at which time the Planning Commission recommended approval subject to
the conditions included in the July 22, 1983, Staff Report.
Penzel asked what the intent of the developer was regarding the grading
which had been done and had left a "scar' on the northern portion of the
property. Carver said this is yet to be worked out with the City. Enger
said definite instructions were given when this project was begun. He
said he was surprised when the grading happened -- the watershed district
was notified as well. He said he does not know what the proponent's inten-
tions are. Enger said he had expected a comprehesive plan of this area
by now. Penzel asked what the time schedule was. Mel Ford, general manager
of Richard Miller Homes, said they will be coming before the City within
a month or two and hope to begin building in the Spring.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to adopt Resolution No,
83-215, approving the preliminary plat of Timber 8ay Manor Homes for
Richard Miller Homes, Inc.
Penzel asked if there will be access 'to the lake from these lots. Ford
said access would be via Outlot F.
Pat 8enton, 7994 Island Road, said this is working out very well and
he recommended the City Council approve the plat,
VOTE ON THE MOTION: motion carried unanimously.
199z
City Council Minutes -7- September 6, 1983
VIII. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
A. 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 40-83 Zoning from Rural to Commercial
Regional Service and adoption of Resolution No. 83-202 approving the
preliminary plat for Menard's. Located east of existing Menard's building
and adjacent to Plaza Drive.
Mary Prochaska, proponent, addressed the revised proposal.
Planning Director Enger noted the modification as requested by the
City Council. He added that the change should break up the southern
elevation of the building and has the potential to look attractive.
Prochaska asked if he might be able to do the project in two steps since
he has a prospect who is "ready to go". Enger said this possibility had
been discussed with Prochaska by City Staff and the concensus was it would
be all right since this would be the approved plan and any additions would
have to conform to it.
Tangen said he appreciated the fact that Prochaska addressed the City
Counci1's concerns.
Anderson expressed concern about the materials which are displayed and
stored on the sidewalk in front of the Menard's store. He asked if some-
• thing could be done to make the sidewalk useable to pedestrians. Penzel
said the City Code includes a provision covering outside display of promo-
( tional materials. Enger said this amounts to 10% of the floor area which
can be used for outdoor displays. Prochaska said he would check on this
tomorrow to make certain Menard's is in conformance. Penzel said it was
his thought that, given the present ordinance, there is nothing the City
can do at this time to rectify the situation. City Attorney Pauly said
the present ordinance would have to be modified if Anderson's concerns
were to be addressed.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to give 1st Reading to Ordinance
No. 40-83. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to adopt Resolution No. 83-202,
approving the preliminary plat for Menard's. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to direct Staff to prepare a
draft summary Resolution of approval per Commission and Staff recommenda-
tions including reference to the sidewalk in front of Menard's and the
condition that it be cleared for use by "cross-traffic." Motion carried
unanimously.
IX. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council Members
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to adopt a Resolution
wishing Councilman George Bentley a happy birthday. Motion carried
unanimously.
City Council Minutes -8- September 6, 1983
Anderson expressed concern about the outside display of materials
such as was previously discussed regarding Menard's. He said he
was not satisfied with how this is presently handled. Penzel said
the Council can request Staff to investigate the matter further.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Tangen, to refer the matter
of outside display of materials to Staff for study and recommendations.
Motion carried unanimously.
B. Report of City Manager
1. Receipt of Draft 1984 City Budget 1
City Manager Jullie distributed copies of the Draft 1984 City
Budget to members of the City Council.
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to hold a Special
Meeting of the City Council on Tuesday, September 13, 1983, at
7:30 p.m. to discuss the 1984 City Budget. Motion carried unanimously.
Councilman Tangen noted he will be out of town on September 13th
but would like to have information on what happens at that meeting
prior to the Council meeting on September 20th.
• There was discussion as to space needs in City Hall. City Manager
Jullie noted the School Board has offered the use of the Board Room
on Mondays and Tuesdays should the Council so desire.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Redpath, to hold the Special
Meeting of the City Council scheduled for 7:30 p,m, on Tuesday,
September 13, 1983, in the Board Room of the School Administration
Building at 8100 School Road. Motion carried unanimously.
C. Report of City Attorney
City Attorney Pauly stated he had furnished members of the Council with
copies of a court order which issued a temporary injunction on Terry Douglas
enjoining him from further grading or land alteration. This order provides
for grading only for purposes of restoration or control of erosion which
might occur. It also requests that the Chief Judge assign the matter for
an early trial.
Pauly said he has followed up on the Supreme Court ruling regarding campaign
signs. He said he has been advised this will be on for oral arguments on
October 12th or 13th. He said he will be monitoring this decision and hopes
it will set forth more definitive guide lines on local authority regulations.
is`iy
City Council Minutes -9- September 6, 1983
D. Report of Director of Public Works
1. Award 1983 Seal Coat Project (Resolution No. 83-216)
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Tangen, to adopt Resolution
No. 83-216, accepting the bid for I.C. 52-055, Seal Coat Project
for 1983. Roll call vote: Anderson, Redpath, Tangen and Penzel
voted "aye." Motion carried unanimously.
X. NEW BUSINESS
There was none.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Anderson, to adjourn the meeting at
9:52 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
•
149S
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 1983 7:30 p.m., School Board Room
Administration Bldg.
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Wolfgang H. Penzel, Richard Anderson, George
Bentley, Paul Redpath and George Tangen
CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Finance Director John
D. Frane, and Recording Secretary Karen Michael
I. ROLL CALL
Councilman George Tangen was absent.
II. CALL MEETING TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Wolfgang H. Penzel.
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Redpath, to approve the Agenda as
published. Motion carried unanimously.
IV. DISCUSSION OF THE 1984 CITY BUDGET
•
City Manager Jullie addressed his memorandum of September 9, 1983, in which
he outlined the significant aspects of the proposed 1984 City Budget and in
which he highlighted major changes from the 1983 budget.
Penzel asked the Council how it wished to proceed with the discussion. It
was determined to review the Budget on a page by page basis.
Redpath asked what effect there would be on the Budget if no more increments
were captured into the tax increment financing district. Finance Director
Frane said there is a balloon payment built into the financing which would
result in heavy levies if the tax increments were not captured. Frane said
the City will only capture the values until there is enough to cover the
debt which has been incurred.
Bentley asked how much one mill means in tax dollars. Frane said a mill
is equal to approximately $224,000. Bentley said this represents the amount
which the City will lose to fiscal disparities; the tax payers in the City
should direct their concerns to the Legislature so this can be corrected.
1996
Special City Council Meeting -2- September 13, 1983
Penzel noted that the quality of management in the City of Eden Prairie
is outstanding; had normal economics prevailed, the City Council would
be looking at a budget 3 - 5 mills higher.
It was suggested the engineering and administration permits and fees
(page 2) be transferred routinely rather than on a year-end basis.
There was discussion (page 4) regarding the additional employees in the
Building Department. The discussion centered around the advantages and
disadvantages of hiring part-time/seasonal employees vs. hiring a speci-
alist (i.e. consultant-type) to do a particular job.
Penzel questioned the deletion of the administrative assistant which had
been recommended by the Council and the 1 clerical position (page 6).
Bentley asked if there was any way of measuring whether or not that posi-
tion would be of value. Redpath said he felt the position would be needed
if the City is to pursue the Star Cities Program. Bentley said it appeared
to him that the City could actually reap benefits over and above the per-
son's salary. Penzel said he felt the Council should take measures to see
that this is done; the press of business now does not allow the Manager to
step away from the position for any amount of time. Bentley noted the City
is growing and the Manager's Staff has not increased in a number of years.
Anderson concurred. The concensus was to leave the position of administra-
tive assistant in the budget.
Penzel questioned the "incremental creep" in the salary figures for Depart-
ment Heads/Supervisors. Frane explained this reflected an additional 8
working hours in 1984 and salary increases which had become effective during
1983.
Page 8: The recommended salary for the Assessor will be looked at further
since the present City Assessor will be retiring effective March 1984.
There was discussion on the cost efficiency of using old police cars by
other City departments. Anderson noted the type of cars which are used
by the Public Safety Department are not fuel efficient. He asked if it
would not be more efficient to get rid of the police cars and buy cars
which would be more fuel efficient for use by City Hall employees. Bentley
asked that more information be provided by Jack Hacking as to the specifi-
cations for police vehicles.
Page 11: Additional information was requested regarding the part time personal
services request, repair & maintenance supplies, building repairs, and construc-
tion materials categories. Anderson asked if consideration might be given to
charging user fees in the City parks.
Bentley suggested using zero based budgeting for the 19B5 City Budget. He
noted he had received a number of complaints from residents regarding the
stationery which is being used by the Community Services Department.
Page 12: Additional information was requested regarding attendance figures
for the various programs offered; are increases in budget figures justified
by increased attendance figures. Anderson suggested programs be looked at
for what they do and not only at what they cost.
NCO
•
Special City Council Meeting -3- September 13, 1983
Page 14: Additional information was requested regarding the Community Event,
Printing & Postage, Supplies, and Revenue items.
Page 15: Additional information was requested on the Other, Storefront,
and Equipment Repair items.
Page 19: Additional information was requested regarding the Part Time
Personal Services item.
1
Page 20: Additional information was requested on the Art & Music and the
Admission Fees items.
Page 21: Additional information was requested on the Fees item. •
Page 22: Anderson asked if the City was involved in the treatment of white
oaks. It was recommended that Stu Fox, City Forester, look at the treatment
of white oaks, perhaps making Arbotect available at cost to homeowners.
Page 23: The concensus was to delete the Chairs and Movie Projector items
•
from the Community Center budget. There was discussion that the movie pro-
jector which was recently purchased for the Water Department could be used
at the Community Center. It was also suggested that a movie projector at the
Community Center could be rented out to those groups/organizations using
the meeting rooms thereby paying for itself over a period of time.
Discussion on the Budget ended after Page 24.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to continue discussion of
the o be held on
Tuesday, September 27, 1983, at 7:30 p.m,4 Budget to a Special Meeting of Motion Council City tcarriedunanimously.
V. NEW BUSINESS
There was disucssion on the number of items to be on the Agenda for the
City Council meeting to be held on Tuesday, September 20, 1983. The con-
sensus was to move review of the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area Plan to
the September 27, 1983, meeting.
MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Bentley, to review the Purgatory Creek
Recreation Area Plan at the Special Meeting of the City Council to be held
on Tuesday, September 27, 1983, at 7:30 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Redpath moved, seconded by Bentley, to adjourn the meeting at
10:50 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
•
p , :
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
THRU: • Bob Lambert, Director of Community S ry s
h
FROM: Sandy Werts, Recreation Supervise
DATE: September 14, 1983
SUBJECT: Authorization to Seek Bids for Mechanical and Electrical Work at
Cummins-Grill Homestead
•
At the May 3, 1983 City Council meeting, staff was authorized to select a restoration
architect to develop cost figures for the replacement of the wiring, installation of
a central heating system, and upgrading plumbing at the Cummins-Grill Homestead. This
work was to be funded through a $19,474 Community Development Block Grant.
Work on the preparation of specifications for this work has been completed and the
cost estimate, excluding the architects fees, is $1S,500. This breaks down as
follows:
Electrical $7,0OO ' •
Plumbing 2,800
Heating 5,700 •
The architect's fee, which is not to exceed $4,O00, included the preparation of
measured drawings which was necessary to preparation of specifications for other
projects.
Staff requests authorization from the City Council to seek bids for the electrical
and mechanical work so that work on this project may commence before winter. The
request for bids would be advertised September 22 and 29, 1983 in the Eden Prairie
News, and September 23 in the Construction Bulletin. The closing date for the bids
will be Tuesday, October 11, at 2:00 p.m.
•
•
•
•
•
is
•
•
•
/999
i
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
THRU: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services
FROM: Sandra F. Werts, Recreation Supervisor
•
DATE: September 15, 1983
SUBJECT: Authorization to Prepare Plans and Specifications for Exterior
Restoration and Seek Quotes
In July, the City Council authorized staff to apply for a restoration grant under
the 1983 Federal Jobs Act. The request was for $12,250 in Federal grants and
$6,125 in State grants, with the City providing a match in the amount of $6,125.
This money was to be used for exterior restoration. The work and estimated costs were:
1. Repointing of 500 square feet brickwork $2,500
•
' • 2. Repair or replace frames, glass, storm windows, sills,
sashes, and paint 26 windows $9,000
3. Repair, refinish, weatherstrip S exterior doors $1,000
4. Paint roof trim, eaves, and bay window $2,000
E
5. Restore front porch $7,000
On August 11, 1983, the City received notification that it was awarded an $8,500 •
Federal grant and a $3,000 State grant for exterior refurbishing. The City's
match of $5,500 will be funded through the use of volunteer and in-kind labor, and
the $3,000 grant from the Eden Prairie Foundation for the window restoration.
$7,500 was cut from the original request and the restoration of the front porch has
been eliminated from the original project. The volunteers would be used for exterior
painting, and in-kind labor would be used to demolish the brick porch on the east
side of the house.
According to Federal guidelines, work on this project must be underway by January
1, 1984, and all work must be completed by July 1, 1984. Staff would like to receive
authorization for the architect to proceed with the development of plans and specif-
ications for this phase of the project, and at the same time to be authorized to seek
quotes for completion of the contracted work.
SW:md
•
•
2600
I
I
MEMO
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Jean Johnson, Zoning Administrator
DATE: September 15, 1983
RE: ORDINANCE NO. 37-83
As requested by the Council, I met with the Eden Prairie 1
Ministers , Pastors, and Priests. The meeting was held
on Sept. 1 at the Eden Prairie Presbyterian Church. Seven
church representatives attended the meeting.
t The draft from our Attorney's office incorporating the
Council's ideas of permitting existing non-conforming
signs, eliminating church symbols from the sign square
footage, and permitting special event signs appeared to
meet their needs. No additional requests were made and
it appears that the churches intend to cooperate on
selecting locations for their off site directional signs.
They plan to request placing 2 or 3 directional signs
upon a single post at the desired intersection, thereby
eliminating the need for 2 or 3 separate posts.
The churches have been informed that the 2nd reading of
the ordinance is on the Council's agenda of Sept. 20th
and they have all received a copy of this most recent
draft. Because the item is on the consent calendar, I
requested they call prior to the meeting if they have
additional questions or comments.
e ,
2001
•
ORDINANCE NO. 37-B3
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION
11.70, SUED. 2., 6., TO REDEFINE DIRECTIONAL SIGNS FOR CHURCHES AND TO ADOPT A
DEFINITION FOR DIRECTIONAL SIGNS FOR SCHOOLS AND PUBLICLY OWNED LAND OR BUILDINGS;
• ADOPTING CITY CODE SECTION 11.70, SUBD. 2., 35., TO DEFINE RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS;
AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 11.70, SUED. 3., T., TO INCLUDE DIRECTIONAL SIGNS FOR
SCHOOLS AND PUBLICLY OWNED LAND AND BUILDINGS; ADOPTING CITY CODE SECTION 11.70,
SUBD. 4., I., RELATING TO PUBLIC DISTRICT SIGNS; ADOPTING CITY CODE SECTION 11.70,
SUBD. 4., I., 5., TO ALLOW EXISTING NON-CONFORMING DIRECTIONAL SIGNS FOR CHURCHES,
SCHOOLS, AND PUBLICLY OWNED LAND OR BUILDINGS TO CONTINUE IN USE SUBJECT TO SECTION
11.75; AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 11.70, SUBD. 6., B., TO EXCLUDE NON-CONFORMING
• DIRECTIONAL SIGNS FOR CHURCHES, SCHOOLS, OR PUBLICLY OWNED LAND OR BUILDINGS FROM
THE SIX YEAR CONFORMANCE REQUIREMENT; AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTERS
1, AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. City Code Section 11.70, Subd., 2., 6., shall be and is
amended to read as follows:
Section 11.70, Subd. 2.,
•
6. Directional signs for churches, schools, or publicly owned land or
buildings--A sign which bears the address and/or name of a church, school, or
publicly owned land or building and a directional arrow pointing to said location.
Section 2. City Code Section 11.70, Spbd. 2., shall be and is amended
by adding 35. to read as follows:
Section 11.70, Subd. 2.,
35. Religious Symbols--Pictures, designs, sculptures, or similar objects
that stand for or suggest religious faith, ideas, or qualities.
Section 3. City Code Section 11.70, Subd. 3., T., shall be and is
amended to read as follows:
Section 11.70, Subd. 3.,
T. Directional signs for churches, schools, or publicly owned land or
buildings shalt be allowed as permitted by Subdivision 4, hereof.
Section 4. City Code Section 11.70, Subd. 4., shall be and is amended
by adding I. to read as follows:
I. Public District
1. Wall Signs: One sign per building not to exceed, 24 square feet in
area. Where a building is located on a corner lot, one sign may be located on each
wall facing a street provided one does not exceed 24 square feet and the other does
not exceed 16 square feet. All wall signs shall be uniform in design. RELIGIOUS
SYMBOLS SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PART OF THE WALL SIGN AREA.
2oO
2. Free-standing signs:
a. One free-standing sign for each building, lot, parcel, or
tract of land may be erected on the lot, parcel, or tract of land it applies or on
which any such building is situated. The maximum height of a free-standing sign
shall be 8 feet and its total area shall not exceed 80 square feet. RELIGIOUS
SYMBOLS SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED PART OF THE FREE-STANDING SIGN AREA.
Where a building has two or more than two street frontages, only one
free-standing sign of the above size shall be permitted and one additional
free-standing sign shall be permitted not to exceed 35 square feet in size.
b. Off-site directional signs: Two additional church, school,
or publicly owned land or buildings directional signs shall be permitted in
locations other than the lot, parcel, or tract of land which it applies. Said signs
shall be erected on non-public land, or if the sign is one owned by a public body
such directional sign may be erected upon public owned property provided:
i. The maximum size of the sign shall not exceed 3
square feet.
11. The owner's permission must be obtained.
The sign shall, be a minimum height of 4 feet,
maximum height of 6 feet.
lv. Signs shall be uniform in design.
3. The signage program will be reviewed by the Director of Planning.
4. TEMPORARY SPECIAL EVENT SIGNS SHALL BE PERMITTED FOR A PERIOD
NOT TO EXCEED 10 DAYS. SUCH SIGNS SHALL BE NO HIGHER THAN 8 FEET AND NOT LARGER
THAN 32 SQUARE FEET.
5. Directional signs to churches, schools, or publicly owned land or
buildings in existence at the date of this section or amendments thereto, which do
not conform to these regulations, shall be allowed to continue in use as provided in
Section 11.75.
Section 5. City Code Section 11.70, Subd. 6., B., shall be and is
amended to read as follows:
Section 11.70, Subd. 6.,
B. A lawful sign on the effective date of this section or of amendments
thereto that does not conform to these provisions shall be regarded as a non-
conforming sign. Except for directional signs for churches, schools, or publicly
owned land or buildings, non-conforming use of which is governed by Section 11.70,
Subd. 4., I., 5., such signs may be continued in use when properly and safely
maintained for a period of six years from the date of enactment of this section or
2003
. :
from the date of any amendments thereto which cause a sign to become non-conforming.
At the end of the six years they shall be made to conform with the provisions of
4 this section or they shall be removed by the owner.
Section 6. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and
Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code including Penalty for Violation" and
. Section 11.99 are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as thou repeated
verbatim herein.
Section 7. This ordinance shall become effective from and after its
passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie on the day of , 1983, and finally read and
adopted and orderedpublished at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City
on the day of , 1983.
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk Wolfgang H. Penze , Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the 'day of , 1983.
{
•
aooq
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST
September 20, 1983
CONTRACTOR (MULTI-FAMILY & COMM.)
Balco Building Systems, Inc.
Lester's of Minnesota, Inc.
Northwest Properties Corporation
Trucker Sheehy Constructors, Inc.
CONTRACTOR (I & 2 Family)
Gawel & Knaeble Contractors, Inc.
Hand Construction, Inc.
Minnesota Home Builders, Inc.
Peterson Pools
HEATING & VENTILATING
Royalton Heating & Cooling
GAS FITTER •
Royalton Heating & Cooling
PLUMBING
R. C. Plumbing
Vending
Coca Cola Bottling Co.
These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible
for the licensed activity.
0.c'
Pat So e", Licensing
2oo5 .
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT REPORT
FOR CREEKVIEW ESTATES 2nd ADDITION
TO: Mayor Penzel and City Council Members
THROUGH: Carl Jullie, City Manager
Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works
f.
• FROM: David L. Olson, Engineering Technician 46:7
DATE: September 14, 1983
' SUBJECT: CREEKVIEW ESTATES 2nd ADDITION
PROPOSAL:
The owner and developer, Lawrence E. Heinen has requested preliminary
and final plat approval of Creekview Estates 2nd Addition. This
plat is a redivision of Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, Creekview Estates
• adjusting the common lot line to accommodate a home proposed by a
purchaser.
HISTORY:
Zoning to RI-13.5 was finally read and approved by the City Council
on October 7, 1980, per Ordinance #79-39.
The final plat of Creekview Estates was approved by the City Council
on February 3, 1981, per Resolution 081-30.
Vacation of the common lot line utility and drainage easement was
authorized by the City Council on September 6, 1983, per Resolution
#83-211.
The Developer's Agreement referred to within this report was executed
on October 7, 1980. This Agreement shall also apply to Creekview
Estates 2nd Addition.
•
SUMMARY:
1. All utilities and streets serving this addition have been installed.
2. The requirements for Park Dedication are covered in the Developer's
Agreement.
3. Bonding will not be necessary.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend approval of the final plat of Creekview Estates 2nd Addition
subject to the requirements of this report, the Developer's Agreement
and the following:
1. Receipt of City Engineering fee in the amount of 560.00.
DLO:sg
September 20, 1983
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPiN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
• RESOLUTION NO. 83-222
A RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY
AND FINAL PLAT OF CREEKVIEW ESTATES
2nd ADDITION
WHEREAS, the plat of Creekview Estates 2nd Addition, has been sub-
mitted in the manner required for platting land .ender the Eden Prairie Ordinance t.
Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been
duly had thereunder, and
WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and
the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordin-
ances of the City of Eden Prairie.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CiTY OF
EDEN PRAIRIE:
A. Plat Approval Request for Creekview Estates 2nd Addition is approved
upon compliance with the reconrnendation of the City Engineer's
Report on this plat dated September 14, 1983
B. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of
this the
Deed
/or
trar ofs Titles nfor their in the useas required Register
requiredby MSAf462.35Bf,dSubd. 3.
C. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy
of this Resolution to the owners and subdividers of the above named
plat.
D. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to Execute
the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon com-
pliance with the foregoing provisions.
ADOPTED by the City Council on September 20, 1983.
Wol gang H. Penzel,,Ma-y-6
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk __._
OUP)
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John D. Frane, Finance Director
DATE: September 16, 1983
RE: Final approval M.I.D.B. Cotton-Hagen - $500,000
Resolution No. 83-230
This project was given preliminary approval by the City
on July 19, 1983. The documents have been reviewed and
approved by the City Attorney's office. Resolution No. 83-230
will be in the Mayor's signature file.
JDF:bw
9/16/53
•
,20o3
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
• SEPTEMBER 13, 1983
PROJECT: Utility and Street Improvements in Lorence 1st & 2nd Addition
I.C. 52-032
TO: ORFEI & SONS, INC.
You are hereby directed to make the following changes to your
Contract for the above referenced project.
NATURE OF CHANGE:
Remove and replace existing subgrade material at locations specified
by the Engineer.
ADJUSTMENTS TO CONTRACT QUANTITIES:
( Add the following quantities to the current Contract quantities.
Subgrade Correction 4184 C.Y. @ $1.55 = $ 6484.20
Subgrade Backfill 3653 C.Y. @ $1.39 = $ 5077.67
Subgrade Backfill 252 S.Y.(84 C.Y.) @
$1.94 (6" thick) x 2
= $ 978.00
TOTAL $ 12,539.87
SUMMARY OF ADJUSTMENTS TO CONTRACT TOTAL AMOUNT:
Contract Total Amount prior to this Change Order $ 235,418.33
Increase resulting from this Change Order $ 12,539.87 1S
Revised Contract Total Amount including this Change Order - $ 247,958.20
THE ABOVE CHANGES ARE APPROVED: THE ABOVE CHANGES ARE ACCEPTED:
THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MN. ORFEI & SONS, INC.
By By
DATE DATE
9/v-1U
•
CITY'OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 38-83
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE
ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99
WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance
(hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made
a part hereof.
Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be
removed from the R1-13.5 District and be placed in the Planned Unit Development 8-83
District (hereinafter "PUD 8-83"), which includes R1-9.5 Zoning District.
Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of
that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of , 1983, entered
into between Centex Homes Midwest, Inc., and the City of Eden Prairie (hereinafter
"Developer's Agreement"). The Developer's Agreement contains the terms and
conditions of PUD 8-83, and are hereby made a part hereof.
Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings:
A. PUD 8-83 is not in conflict with the goals of the Guide Plan of the
City.
B. PUD 8-83 is designed in such a manner to form a desirable and
unified environment within its own boundaries.
C. The exceptions to the standard requirements of Chapters 11 and 12 of
the City Code, which are contained in PUD 8-83, are justified by the
design of the development described therein.
D. PUD 8-83 is of sufficient size, composition, and arrangement that
its construction, marketing, and operation is feasible as a complete
unit without dependence upon any subsequent unit.
Section 5. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and
hereby is, removed from the R1-13.5 District and shall be included hereafter in the
Planned Unit Development 8-83 District, and the legal descriptions of land in each
district referred to in City Code Section 11.03, subdivision 1, subparagraph B,
shall be and are amended accordingly.
Section 6. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and
• Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and
Section 11.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their
entirety by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 7. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its
2 010
•
passage and publication. jI�
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie on the day of , and finally read and
adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City
on the day of .
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of
•
i
2010 A
•
•
•
•
•
Exhibit A -
1
Legal Description
•
Block 5, Lots 19-47, Block 6, Ridgewood West, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
is
•
•
•
•
2C11
Ridgewood Westover-Centex
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1983,
by and between Centex Homes Midwest, Inc., Nevada corporation, hereinafter referred
to as "Owner," and the CITY OF EOEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter
referred to as "City;"
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, City previously approved agreements for development of the land,
between Owner and City, said land being that as described in Exhibit A, attached
• hereto and made a part hereof, and hereinafter referred to as "the property," and
said previous agreements between Owner and City described below and as follows:
A Oecember 5, 1978, agreement for 88 acres of land, approving zoning from
Rural to R1-13.5 for 176 single family lots on approximately 86 acres and a
totlot on approximately 1.75 acres;
An amendment to the December 5, 1978, agreement, dated February 20, 1979;
An amendment to the December 5, 1978, agreement, dated September 21, 1982,
agreement for 64 acres of the original 88 acres described in the December 5,
1978, agreement, approving Planned Unit Oevelopment #82-168; and,
WHEREAS, Owner has applied for Planned Unit Oevelopment District for medium
density clustered single family residential development, Zoning Oistrict change
from R1-13.5 to R1-9.5 and preliminary plat of 18.39 acres of the original 88 acres
for 83 lots;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Ordinance #38-83 and
Resolution #83-132, Owner covenants and agrees to construction upon, development,
and maintenance of said property as follows:
1. Owner shall plat and develop the property in conformance with the
20 io
•
• material revised and dated August 26, 1983, reviewed and approved by
•
the City Council on August 2, 1983, and attached hereto as Exhibit B •
{ and made a part hereof, subject to such changes and modifications as
provided herein. Owner shall not develop, construct upon, or
maintain the property in any other respect or manner than provided
herein.
2. Owner covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by
Owner at such times and in such manner as provided therein of all of
the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in
Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
•
3. Owner shall develop the property in accordance with that certain
developer's agreement dated December 5, 1978, as amended February
20, 1979, and September 21, 1982, entered into by and between Owner
and City, except to the extent that said agreement is inconsistent
with this Agreement. Such agreement, as amended, is incorporated
herein by reference.
Planned Unit Development #82-168, approved by the City Council, is
hereby amended to the extent that it is inconsistent with this
Agreement.
4. Prior to any grading or construction on the property, Developer
shall place a snow fence around the wooded areas of the property as
depicted on Exhibit 8. Developer shall not permit others to disturb
the area within the snow fencing.
5. Prior to building permit issuance, Owner shall submit to the
Director of Planning, and receive the Director's approval of a
revised landscaping plan, with grading, site layout, plant material,
type, and sizes.
6. Concurrent with street and utility construction, Owner shall, in
accordance with the specifications of the City Engineer, construct a
five-foot wide, five-inch deep, concrete sidewalk, with let-down
curb and gutter, in the following locations:
a. West and north of the driving surface, and outside of the
right-of-way of Knollwood Drive, commencing at Cumberland
Road and terminating at Hawthorne Drive.
b. East and south of the driving surface, and outside of the
right-of-way of Hawthorne Drive, commencing at Knollwood
Drive and terminating at Cumberland Road.
•
1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have caused these presents
to be executed as of the day and year aforesaid.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
•
Carl J. Jullie, City Manager
•
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 1983, by Wolfgang H. Penzel, the Mayor, and Carl J. Jullie,
the City Manager, of the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on
( behalf of the corporation.
Notary Public
CENTEX HOMES MIDWEST, INC.
'Timothy R. Eller, President
Minnesota Division
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 1983, by Timothy R. Eller, President, Minnesota Division,
Centex Homes Midwest, Inc., a Nevada corporation, on behalf of the corporation.
201(1 Public
I
Ridgewood West 2nd/Westover
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA '
RESOLUTION NO. 83-217
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY
OF ORDINANCE 38-83 AND ORDERING THE
PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 38-83 was adopted and ordered published at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the day of
, 1983;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE:
A. That the text of the summary of Ordinance No. 38-83, which is
attached hereto, is approved, and the City Council finds that said
text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of said
ordinance.
B. That said text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie News in a -
body type no smaller than brevier or eight-point type, as defined in
Minn. Stat. sec. 331.07.
C. That a printed copy of the Ordinance shall be made available for
inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office
of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance
shall be posted in the City Hall.
D. That Ordinance No. 38-83 shall be recorded in the ordinance book,
along with proof of publication required by paragraph B herein,
within 20 days after said publication.
ADOPTED by the City Council on , 1983.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
zoto F
Ridgewood West 2nd/Westover
The following is the full text of the City of Eden Prairie Ordinance No. 38-83,
which was adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Eden Prairie on , 1983. Following the text of the
Ordinance, the Developer's Agreement, which is incorporated therein by Section 5 of
the Ordinance, is summarized.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
•
ORDINANCE NO. 38-83
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY DF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE
ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99
WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EOEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance
(hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made
a part hereof.
Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be
removed from the R1-13.5 District and be placed in the Planned Unit Development 8-83
District (hereinafter "PUD 8-83"), which includes R1-9.5 Zoning District.
Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of
that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of , 1983, entered
into between Centex Homes Midwest, Inc., and the City of Eden Prairie (hereinafter
"Developer's Agreement"). The Developer's Agreement contains the terms and
conditions of PUD 8-83, and are hereby made a part hereof.
Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings:
A. PUD 8-83 is not in conflict with the goals of the Guide Plan of the
City.
B. PUD 8-83 is designed in such a manner to form a desirable and
unified environment within its own boundaries.
C. The exceptions to the standard requirements of Chapters 11 and 12 of
the City Code, which are contained in PUD 8-83, are justified by the
design of the development described therein.
D. PUD 8-83 is of sufficient size, composition, and arrangement that
its construction, marketing, and operation is feasible as a complete
unit without dependence upon any subsequent unit.
Section 5. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and
hereby is, removed from the R1-13.5 District and shall be included hereafter in the
Planned Unit Development 8-83 District, and the legal descriptions of land in each
district referred to in City Code Section 11.03, subdivision 1, subparagraph B,
shall be and are amended accordingly.
Section 6. City Code chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and
Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and
( Section 11.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their
entirety by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 7. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its
passage and publication.
•
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie on the day of , and finally read and
adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City
on the day of
.ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of
Summary of Developer's Agreement: Ridgewood West 2nd/Westover
Developer will develop the land as described in Exhibit A which is attached
to and incorporated in the Developer's Agreement. In addition, the Developer's
Agreement provides for:
1. Submission of plans regarding sewer, water, and drainage to Engineering
Department.
2. Submission to the City Engineer of a development Plan for the land.
3. Submission to Watershed District of storm sewer construction plans.
Developer to follow the rules and regulations of said Watershed District.
•
4. Developer's warranty of title to the land.
5. Construction and maintenance of public improvements which are to be conveyed
to the City as well as preservation and restoration of areas surrounding
said improvements. Submission of a bond or letter of credit to ensure the
quality of said construction, maintenance, preservation, and restoration.
6. Rough grading to be performed by the Developer for improvements which the
City will construct pursuant to 100% petition of all owners of the land.
Submission of a bond or letter of credit for the rough grading.
7. Payment of first three (3) years' street lighting, engineering review; and
street signs costs.
8. Developer's commitment not to oppose rezoning if Developer fails to proceed
in accordance with the Developer's Agreement within 24 months.
9. Application of the Developer's Agreement to transferees of the land.
10. City's remedies in the event that Developer violates the provisions of the
Developer's Agreement.
11. Notice to the City's cable franchise.
12. Compliance with developer's agreement dated December 5, 1979, as amended and
dated February 20, 1979, and September 21, 1982, to the extent that such
agreements are not consistent with the agreement dated -
, 1983.
13. Developer agrees to place a snow fence around the wooded areas of the
property as depicted on Exhibit B, prior to grading or construction upon the
property. Developer shall not allow others to disturb the areas within the
snow fencing.
14. Developer shall submit to the Director of Planning, and receive the
Director's approval of, a landscaping plan, with grading, site layout, plant
material, type, and sizes.
15. Concurrent with street and utility construction, Owner shall construct a
five-foot wide, five-inch deep, concrete sidewalk, with let-down curb and
in 1 _
gutter, in the following locations:
West and north of the driving surface, and outside of the right-of-
way of Knollwood Drive, commencing at Cumberland Road and
terminating at Hawthorne Drive.
East and south of the driving surface, and outside of the right-of-
way of Hawthorne Drive, commencing at Knollwood Drive and
terminating at Cumberland Road.
NOTICE: A printed copy of this ordinance is available for inspection by any person
during regular office hours at the office of the City Clerk.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on , 1983.
John D. Frane, City Clerk Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
•
•
a0107
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 83-218
A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH SPECIFIC CONDITIONS
OF COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE BURGER KING RESTAURANT
AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY #5 AND COUNTY ROAD #4
BE IT RESOLVED that the proposal for a restaurant on 2.15 acres for Burger King,
located south of Highway #5 and east of County Road #4, is herein approved subject
to the following specific conditions:
1. The plans revised and dated August 8, 1983, and attached hereto as Exhibit
A, shall apply.
2. Prior to building permit issuance, Burger King shall:
A. Submit detailed water, sanitary and storm sewer plans to the
Engineering Department for review and receive the Engineering
Department's approval of said plans.
B. Receive the approval of the Watershed District.
'C. Provide a copy of the easement referred to in Exhibit B, Letter of
Intent, attached hereto and made a part hereof, to the City.
D. Prior to subdivision of the parcel, access from the future parcel to
the east shall be provided to the public road referred to in Exhibit
B, Letter of Intent.
3. Prior to occupancy permit issuance, the road referred to in the Letter of
Intent, Exhibit B hereof, shall be constructed to standards acceptable to
the City Engineer.
ADOPTED by the City Council on , 1983.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Franc, City Clerk •
aoil
•
.,,...--- RECITALS . R
Letter of Intent 1`C
Burger i:.eg Corporation, Birchwood Laboratories and E. A. Sween
own property abutting on a private driveway owned by E. A. Sween
which provides access to County Road 4. burger King Corporation
and Birchwood Laboratories want access to the driveway for the
purpose of giving their respective properties access to County
• Road 4. Both Burger King and E. A. Sween have development
applications and proposals at the present time in front of the
City of Eden Prairie. The City has indicated a desire to resolve
the access to County Road 4 over the present driveway, as a
condition to the development of the Burger King proposals and the
E. A. Sween proposal and possible future development of Birchwood
Laboratories' property. This letter is made for the purpose of
memorializing the intent of the parties with respect to the
• question of access to County Road 4 from their respective
properties.
INTENT
The undersigned companies, for the purpose of setting forth their
respective intent, hereby state as follows:
1. That it is the intent of the parties that a roadway will
be constructed approximately 38 feet in width, with a concrete
curb and gutter, appropriate drainage and 3-1/2" of bituminous
surface over 8" of Class 5 base, with 1" of overlay over the
existing bituminous roadway from County Road 4 going East
approximately 200 feet. *At said point there will be a turn-around
provided with an approximate 60 foot radius. There will be access
through the turn-around to the E.A. Sween property.
2. That after completion of the roadway to the approximate
- foregoing specifications and its acceptance by the City as a
properly constructed roadway, E. A. Sween Company shall dedicate
to the City of Eden Prairie said portion as a public roadway.
3. That Burger King and Birchwood Labs shall pay the cost
of a security gate for E. A. Sween Company to be erected at the
existing Easterly end of the roadway up to a cost of $8,500.
4. That E. A. Sween Company shall allow Burger King access
01 during the period of construction and up until acceptance by the
ma City of the public roadway. Provided, however, that in the event
Burger King and Birchwood Labs do not promptly move toward
ram' completion of the roadway; or, fail to correct any conditions
necessary for acceptance by the City, said easement shall cease to
exist.
5. Burger King and Birchwood Labs shall provide necessary
surveys to properly and adequately describe the area of public
dedication.
6. That Burger King and Birchwood Labs, jointly and
severally, shall hold E. A. Sween Company harmless from the costs
of all construction contemplated herein.
,.... 1} ir
or to City standards, if different from above ob a
7. That the foregoing Is conditioned upon E. A. Sween
receiving approval to proceed with its office building development
presently before the City and shall not be effective until such
development is approved. •
E. A. SWEEN COMPANY•
•
Douglas M. fincham
Its: Vivo Prrei./tont of (l+wra►inns
BURGER KING
Its: e4
BIRCHWOOD LABORATORIES
By: //./,d
John A.06,464);74
Its:
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
( ORDINANCE NO. 43-83
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE
• ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99
WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance
• (hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made
a part hereof.
Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be
removed from the Rural District and be placed in the Highway Commercial District.
Section 3. That the proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be,
and hereby is removed from the Rural District and shall be included hereafter in the
Highway Comnercial District, and the legal descriptions of land in each District
referred to in City Code, Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B, shall be,
and are amended accordingly.
Section 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and
Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and
Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their
entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 5. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of
that certain Resolution #83-218, approved and adopted by the City Council of the
City of Eden Prairie on the day of , 1983, which Resolution is
hereby made a part hereof.
Section 6. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its
passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie on the day of , and finally read and
adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City
on the day of
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of
2OlQ
ROO BRUN V ICK°YE.S. LOT SURVEYS COMPANY RAYMOND O ►RASCN
GOLDEN VALLEY,MINK 0I7 IDAN AVE N.
MINK.REG.N MINN.0.Del LAND SURVEYORS $ROOKLYR PARK. MINK,
RE6.N0.MO
SSOYTSSSO UNDO LAWS Or OUTS OF lmetOOTA 12380
INVOICE NO.
7�01-73d Arc No. N0411117 F. II. NO.
INDUSTRIAL—JUDICIAL MWr.e,euu.Mimwou SSJ2$
COMMERCIAL— TOPOGRAPHICAL SCALE 1" is
CITY LOTS—PLATTING Ourorgarg anti/Irate 0 - DENOTES IRON
BURGER KING CORPORATION
Proposed description for rezoning
• That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter
of Section 8 and of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast
Quarter of Section 17, Township 116, Range 22 described as
follows: Commencing at the Northwest corner of the Northeast
1/4 of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 17; thence South
0 degrees 08 minutes 44 seconds East, assumed bearing, along
the West line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast
Quarter a distance of 271.98 feet; thence North 87 degrees
25 minutes 16 seconds East a distance of 13.17 feet to the
East line of County Road No. 4 and the actual point of
beginning of the tract of land to be herein described; thence
North 87 degrees 25 minutes 16 seconds East 207.00 feet;
thence North 2 degrees 15 minutes 15 seconds West to the inter-
r section with the Southwesterly line of State Highway No. 5;
thence Northwesterly along said Southwesterly line to its
intersection with the Easterly line of County Road No. 4;
thence Southwesterly and Southerly along said Easterly line
to the actual point of beginning.
•
•
•
lot"
r Cg2,
W.hereby certify Met this It.tore end correct reprment.tie.
.f a howl of the boundaries of IL..bove daccrib.d land..d
M. location of ail buildinyr..d slilbl. .acroechemnN. if ary.
from or ea.ad had.
Sow*by vs SW___day of It 20 F S• LOT SURVEYS COMPANY
•
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
• HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 42-83
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 79-17 AND ADDPTING
BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH, •
AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That Section 2. of Ordinance No. 79-17 is hereby amended to
read as follows:
"Section 2. The above described property shall be subject to the terms
and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated June 19, 1979, between
Stewart In-Fra Red Commissary of Minnesota, Inc., and the City of Eden Prairie, and
that certain Supplement to said Developer's Agreement dated
, 1983, both of which are hereby made a part hereof and
shall be subject to all of the ordinances, rules, and regulations of the City of
Eden Prairie relating to the I-2 Park District."
Section 2. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and
Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code, Including Penalty for Violation" and
Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor," are hereby adopted in their
entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective from and after its
passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden j
Prairie on the 16th day of August, 1983, and finally read and adopted and ordered
published at a regular meeting
of the City Council of said City on the day of
1983.
i•
• Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
•
ao o
� J J
r
•
�BF°,S$�::oaa• S�°'.�1:cs��:oi�•MS:°. 1�rea'd'€g:TfiES°.a+ 'C.e.'w. •;?'t `e
3 : ;;="ae e,,N:lym�;a�� .::i. e-y^d n :.
w .�.o". a:ZeC��$ :4`^& e� 4;es; os'• « 14:,,L -irg?:•: ; ::a:3^'7. >;Siz'
pP i^ �O^ Dp.Y.a>On ie0 ::J: . ,pP•.°.::tl.°�$ , ::w D:e^9y;iw ;$S
YC •�u^ •R.'":V e>i V'rJ C:DO^nwO V e n°!i:F • •'ri rg2 :d'i•n?:21 n4. .--;!i 2 a^O>4 yi
`_D :S . '• igi1S . :r:°8:� Y^:3° .Srw^i:-oo.l:�.S'o.'•n.^.1;•i.. i:;:•>'iq
PS:^.:•�o�.- ' "^-:�+°'...'.: n.'o•S,.•> `:..7b'•iy�E . i" ^L:'$..C6joj . oer.°.
• iiir.,74;:ti•!!i;::rillirilei
v $iiii. i..R•.^e^v C' : Or.O..D:.> ..w• ^ST :$^pe
'.[•a'c::n' - .. o�•a`S,±w^ :Z; � w. `�.o �:off=. �;
.o7:::e �.-a ..>,.e�aE� • c6p�:^. ' ;���rS �.Proes.w:$^.•6 ;eow$o-.. =C3'£ `S^.^�^.i. ^`•^,o[.°'.3li ..• ' ;.D.. ' n, [:'wn Iii!:-;!;:iiiillillirilli;i5:iiiii
$^'aFn:":°aa':on^:S�w °"e'r•j''q^•
M"^::�i•"-D •'".c^ ..°.a.°.'Q :i::o ; ; °•llr.'•i..8^.°,Lao-'CT'S:� •R�>>' .. •^�..-.: :.>n^ , .ian'n �::4 ;�C•S�G�F�wYQ. �a :€o '^ :�� . ":�.5�^SBS ',"$ erg "s: a _ 3Sg ^o' s..c >..6� «So' Sw�.°,!S6.0•;: ,.'^.S^iET•,S<c :Y :S' v�^°^ p-,> >rg D`^n!t , g,: •°tee .•; P..-"'�•°.: O iii; :ir; :a 'R .'.o:TSrPSe3 c' qi^>
=• ^•,w•..o..n^$ >a::o$:oq •. Pg .t SSSi^ w : $$C:°tn iu: -
frA r.
• a!; i"Sw S"::i 3 ., . .£ { . •t � :� ,;�.•• �sw it �sx3:;
.
• I.
,
•
gc :;sg>s4= ^�$o 's'est ., tcYacy:€: �r2•t �°£�aod• x•.-g:•trq��11 ;sss^
Er.s^ drwn P"'� `•6 Dd` 3£^° a €.'^.e�7 ..:C1.o 2do:io Ng
C �: S' �o. -nnr: n '::•`w"w^>� '31?::+ ^' !. > :ice"
FCS :p^ •2i^Io Pi: Sm $eo ve .rs-i' aP^..•_S•, _n'.o•D3;: '£"• ~
Fay•°+^� � °Y� � :D $D°, '.• • •- ^�.°,ejY'n ^.°.a'.°.p�: •:� ..o;••'i.°.vew .•.o'n p 1 :os
• CSa' [ f` "8: ':O^ E HI:
.^-$['000d':.................................
...... ^oo..x:^D.... ;"S:�i
S>e di. ^P►••P [w[•� �.� O R •°O>..:0 f O.w:�e�^OPO£aFg n CO:�O•+0 � I��
E°CSC.. b• n ooa ^ ^°+ -^^
T ;-. a �' BR� '�� :. sA[S' a ���:` _ T'QS Fa:
frc;T3 'a'^esinco�: > 'i! ; ^ sto �rz:Qoi' si' �;:; s!g
s ^:: n a- >s: .-
C F...; id : ^ ae a >^= ^ ^boy ^ ��tIp+e na°` `.:o
$dCC Win£ �j:: ^_ j e.°,^ $`_ - e$ry.?�8 a a eei :E'.00� .
�i'z.;r » 'a^• !:: i -Ndo' °^,••^°:c.:ii! Cog`.'-a�4e;D.
Pid> ;,•- :.3F r.> sc,,.'.'btSo� n � ••�'o: .FnS:.� •d
wee i!-:%? e: :[:O d, i!•41:i:a: -Sn£S^4:.7^,YD$SFo:: " �> ;
•C�oD e:' ": ::` �° :n Doi ^ ..�D:' ° ' " • _i; o� ^
pit .. p▪ act;!•- N4a`• .' o$ o ,`Q> n> ..e �:;^
▪ egqg '
w P.
r `
•
• ,201(26
SUPPLEMENT TO
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
STEWART IN-FRA RED COMMISSARY OF MINNESOTA, INC.
(NOW KNOWN AS E. A. SWEEN COMPANY)
AND
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
This Supplement to Developer's Agreement made and entered
into as of this — day of , 1983, by and between
' E. A. Sween Company, a Minnesota corporation, formerly known as
Stewart In-Fra Red Commissary of Minnesota, Inc., a Minnesota
corporation, hereinafter referred to as Sween, owners of the
property as described in developer's agreement between Stewart
In-Fra Red Commissary of Minnesota, Inc., a Minnesota corporation,
and the City of Eden Prairie, for the property described in said
agreement in Exhibit A, dated June 19, 1979, and the City of Eden
Prairie, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as
"City;"
WHEREAS, Stewart In-Fra Red Commissary of Minnesota, Inc.,
and City made and entered into a Developer's Agreement, dated June
19, 1979, for the property, (the "Developer's Agreement") and
Sween has succeeded to all of the rights and interest in the lands
included within said "Developer's Agreement;" and,
WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend said agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between the parties
thereto as follows:
1. The Developer's Agreement shall be and hereby is
supplemented and amended in the following respects:
a. Paragraph 1. shall be amended to read as follows:
-1-
2011.g
Owner shall develop the property in conformance
with the revised material dated August 24, and
August 17, 1983, reviewed and approved as amended
by the City Council on August 16, 1983, and
attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such
changes and modifications as provided herein.
b. Paragraph 3. is deleted.
c. Paragraph 4. shall be amended to read as follows:
Any parking or storage of vehicles over 3/4 ton on
the property and not within an enclosed building
must be screened from T.H. #5 and County Road #4 as
shown on the development plan and reasonably
screened from adjacent land uses. Prior to the
issuance of a building permit, the Owner shall
apply for and use its best efforts to obtain a
variance from the provisions of the City Code to
permit outside parking or storage of vehicles over
3/4 ton on the property. In the event the variance
is not granted, neither the provisions of this
agreement, nor the application or proceedings
related to the application by the Owner to obtain
the variance shall be of any effect or prejudice to
any rights (i) of the Owner or claim made in any
proceeding including, but not limited to, claims by
the Owner that the City Code does not prohibit its
use of the property relative to trucks, or that
such use constitutes a nonconforming use under the
City Code, (ii) or by the City in opposition to
such claims.
d. There shall be added paragraphs 5. and 6. as
follows:
5. Prior to building permit issuance, Owner shall
submit to the Director of Planning and obtain
the Director's approval of a
landscape/screening plan for the property, including
the purposes set forth in Paragraph 4.
6. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy, the Owner shall submit to the City
Engineer and obtain the Engineer's approval of
a warranty deed for the west access road from
County Road #4 to approximately 200 ft. east
of County Road #4 as shown on the attached
Exhibit C. The City understands that the
development of the roadway is currently
subject of an agreement between E. A. Sween
Company, Burger Ring Corporation and Birch
-2-
201 L
Wood Laboratories. Said agreement provides
that the roadway will be improved to City
•
standards and at that time all parties holding
right of way will deed to the City appropriate
lands. The City may, upon request of Sween,
delay the receipt of the warranty deed in
order to allow completion pursuant to the
agreement of the parties. If the roadway is
dedicated prior to final completion to City's
standards, and there is a subsequent
improvement and assessment by the City, E. A.
Sween Company will be granted credit for the
value of land dedicated toward such road
project..subject to Conformance with any statutory Limitations_.
2. Sween agrees to all of the terms and conditions and
accepts the obligations of the "Owner• under the Developer's
Agreement, as amended and supplemented herein.
WHEREFORE, the parties hereto have executed this Supplement
to Developer's Agreement the day and year first above written.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
•
( Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
Carl J. Jullie, City Manager
•
-3-
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day
of , 1983, by Wolfgang H. Penzel, the Mayor, and Carl J.
Jullie, the City Manager, of the City of Eden Prairie, a municipal
corporation, on behalf of the corporation.
NOTARY PUBLIC
E. A. SWEEN COMPANY
•
.-1/y Lf..—
Thomas Sween, President
•
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) i;
I
T ore•oing instrument was acknowledged by me this [Iv day of
. LE ,,L, 1983, by Thomas Sween, President of E. A. Sween
Company, a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the corporation.
()01
.N1 Al .1 \AOmn4 9c,
NZjARY PUBLIC
r 6IJDY M.NIEMELI
NOTARY PUBLIC•'MINNESOTA
CARVER COUNTY
NYCommhsion tons Jan 26 IM8I,
x YlN.
•
-4-
2U16 E
•
EXHIBIT C
•
•
•
That part of the Northeast qu:.rter of the Northeast quarter of Section 17,
Towns). r. 11/, R:mge 27.., desrrited as fellows: Per inr.ir.; of the Northwest corner of
said !ort.l.a:tst :tarter of the Northeast yusrta•r; th.onc• South 'long the Weat line of
soid ,or'l:ear.t eusrter of the ?'orthea.nt c::.rt: r to the forth line of the South quar-
'ter e'' skid ':ertheest qu:rt.•r of the NortNel:t :;uarter:' Vence East clong said North
line rf the. South ?uertcr e! th-* Northeast ..•a.rter of the Nerth:^ect quarter to a
point t.'reor.. .'is tint 1106.R feet West cf t;:•: E;at t •: et s•.id Section 17 as rees-
crud s•lon,; said :.ort6! line of the South .pu.-t• r of t`. :'erthcsat evertor of the. North-
•. east c,uarter, said point being the point of he inrtr.: of a lire hereirafter referred
• to as ":line 0"; ther.ce forth parallel with :Aid East li:.o of Section 17 a distance of
440.17. feet, arc said "mine: A" there endii.r'; :hence: ?asterl.• to "Point X" hereinafter
desrriieai; t•.••neo North 23°14'14" east 04.98 feat tore or less to the Southerly
• ri,,ht-of-we;: lint• of St+:ti :r-.•c a1Cheey L , Sus descrite:S as Parcel 16 of final
rertifieete recorded ;s Dor, pie, 3087;92; thence •orttwesterl.y, Northeasterly, and
. Northtl:.ter',i elan s.ta r .t-cf-way 11::a :: the ':nrth fine cf rit': eortheast quar-
ter of the Northeast quart Sri thence :.cat .long sal.. North line to the point of begin-
ning, 1.:XCEP'T that o:rt thereof described as beginning' at said Northwest corner of th..
Northeast ::uarter of the Northeast quarter: thence Scut:: along said West line of the
northeast -usrter of the Northeast quarter a oirtanco of 2(16.98 feet to the point of
oe;;in'ing of a line hereinafter ra•ferred to as "Line A"; ther.'a ?last deflecting to
tho left 92°26' a distance of 35C.55 feet, and said."Line A' there ending; thence at
r ght angle North to the Southwesterly right-of-way lien of said State eighway No. 5; thence
Northwesterly, Northeasterly, and Northwesterly alon; said right-of-way lino to said North
line of the Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter; thence :art alone said North line to
the poirt of befirr.ir.g; A[SC EXCEPT that Hart thereof lying within the 7.asterent for County
Road No. 4 as described in Doeu'ent !'o. 353E642; ALSO EXCEPT that Part thereof lying South of
a line drawn parallel with and 35 feet South, measured at right angles, from said "Line A" and
lyire West of said "Line 8" and its Northerly extension.
Said "Point X" is located as follows: Commencing at a point on the Last line of the Northeast
quarter of the Northeast quarter of said Section 17 distant 180 feet South of the Northeast
corner thereof (said lest line being assumed to have a bearing of South); ther.ce South E8°13'
West along a line parallel with the Westerly extension of the t'orth line of Section lb, Town-
ship 116, Flange 22, a dirtsren of 2.0 feet; thence South 23°14'14" West a dintence of 353.30
feet more or less to a mint in a line drawn parallel with the Westerly extension of the North
line of soid Section 16 from a point. on the West line of said Section 16 distant 500.40 feet
South. of the Northwest corner of eatd Section 16, and distant 141.46 Poet Westerly of the Weet
line of said Section 16 as measured along said Parallel line; thence South 18°10'27" West a
distance of 82.52 feet along a line which if extended would intersect the North line of the
South quarter of said Northeast oua^ter of the Northeast quarter of Section 17 at a point
thereon distant 3( .63 feat We:t of the Fast lin^ of said Section 1^, ns measured alone said
No' line cc the fauth •:u•:rter of the !'orthoart cuarter of the No-theast quarter; thence
No 69°40 West a ,1i„tance of 71',A6 feet to the intersection uit.h a line drawn parallel
with and dist.ent FF3.')2 feat West of the East line °f said Section 17 as saae:red along said
North line of the So::.h q•u,rtnr of the Northeast ouarter of the lorthwust quarter, said point
of intersection is desi,•nateci as "Point C", accoriin; to the United States Gov+rne"nt Survey
thereof sr,d situ•.te ir. ::'•nnepir: (•ounty, h'innesrta.
20it.F .
•
• E. A. Sween
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 83-219
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY
OF ORDINANCE 42-83 AND ORDERING THE
PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 42-83 was adopted and ordered published at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the day of
, 1983;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN •
PRAIRIE:
A. That the text of the summary of Ordinance No. 42-83, which is
attached hereto, is approved, and the City Council finds that said
text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of said
ordinance.
B. That said text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie News in a
body type no smaller than brevier or eight-point type, as defined in
' Minn. Stat. sec. 331.07.
C. That a printed copy of the Ordinance shall be made available for
inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office
of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance
shall be posted in the City Hall.
D. That Ordinance No. 42-83 shall be recorded in the ordinance book,
along with proof of publication required by paragraph B herein,
within 2D days after said publication.
. ADOPTED by the City Council on , 1983.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
The following is the full text of the City of Eden Prairie Ordinance No. 43-83,
which was adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of
the ' City of Eden Prairie on , 1983. Following the text of the
Ordinance, the Developer's Agreement and Supplement to the Developer's Agreement,
which is incorporated therein by Section 2 of the Ordinance, is summarized.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE 1.
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 42-83
•
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 79-17 AND ADOPTING
.BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH,
AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
•
•
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
. Section 1. That Section 2. of Ordinance No. 79-17 is hereby amended to
read as follows:
"Section 2. The above described property shall be subject to the terms
and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated June 19, 1979, between
Stewart In-Fra Red Commissary of Minnesota, Inc., and the City of Eden Prairie, and
that certain Supplement to said Developer's Agreement dated
, 1983, both of which are hereby made a part hereof and
shall be subject to all of the ordinances, rules, and regulations of the City of
( Eden Prairie relating to the I-2 Park District."
Section 2. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and
Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code, Including Penalty for Violation" and
Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor," are hereby adopted in their
entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective from and after its
passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie on the 16th day of August, 1983, and finally read and adopted and ordered
published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the day of
, 1983.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
•
201(�I�
Summary of Developer's Agreement: E. A. Sween
Developer will develop the land as described in Exhibit A which is attached
to and incorporated in the Developer's Agreement. In addition, the Developer's
Agreement provides for:
1. Submission of plans regarding sewer, water, and drainage to Engineering
Department.
2. Submission to the City Engineer of a development Plan for the land.
3. Submission to Watershed District of storm sewer construction plans.
Developer to follow the rules and regulations of said Watershed District.
4. Developer's warranty of title to the land.
5. Construction and maintenance of public improvements which are to be conveyed
to the City as well as preservation and restoration of areas surrounding
said improvements. Submission of a bond or letter of credit to ensure the
quality of said construction, maintenance, preservation, and restoration.
6. Developer's commitment not to oppose rezoning if Developer fails to proceed
in accordance with the Developer's Agreement within 24 months.
7. Application of the Developer's Agreement to transferees of the land.
8. City's remedies in the event that Developer violates the provisions of the
Developer's Agreement.
9. Notice to the City's cable franchise. •
10. Developer shall submit to the Director of Planning, and receive the
Director's approval of, a landscaping plan, with grading, site layout, plant
material, type, and sizes.
11. Developer agrees to all the terms and conditions and accepts the obligations
of the "Owner" under the Developer's Agreement dated June 19, 1979, as
amended and supplemented herein.
12. Developer agrees that, prior to issuance of an occupancy permit, Developer
shall submit a warranty deed for the west access road.
• t.
13. Developer shall apply for a variance to the City for outside parking and
storage of vehicles over 3/4 ton on the property.
NOTICE: A printed copy of this ordinance is available for inspection by any person
during regular office hours at the office of the City Clerk.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on , 1983.
John D. frane, City Clerk Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 40-83
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE
ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND •
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99
WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance
(hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made
a part hereof.
Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be
removed from the Rural District and be placed in the Commercial Regional Service
District.
Section 3. That the proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be,
and hereby is removed from the Rural District and shall be included hereafter in the
Commercial Regional Service District, and the legal descriptions of land in each
District referred to in City Code, Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B,
• shall be, and are amended accordingly.
•
Section 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and
Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and
Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their
entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 5. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of
that certain Resolution #83-220, approved by the City Council of the City of Eden j.
Prairie, which Resolution is hereby made a part hereof.
Section 6. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its
passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie on the day of , and finally read and
adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City
on the day of
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
1
RESOLUTION NO. 83-220
A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH SPECIFIC CONDITIONS
OF COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE MENARD'S SHOPPING CENTER
LOCATED WEST OF PLAZA DRIVE, NORTH OF HIGHWAY #5
BE IT RESOLVED that the proposal for a shopping center for Menard's, located west of
Plaza Drive and North of Highway #5, consisting of 1.6 acres, is herein approved
subject to the following specific conditions:
1. The plans revised and listed below, and attached hereto as Exhibit A, shall
apply:
A. Landscape plan/elevations showing park bench area, 3-sided sign,
•
etc., dated June 8, 1983
B. Preliminary Plat revised July 19, and August 2, 1983, showing
additional berming.
C. Written signage detail entitled "Exhibit C" from the Menard Plaza
Shopping Center Lease.
2. Prior to building permit issuance:
A. Submit detailed water, sanitary, and storm sewer plans to the
Engineering Department for review and receive the Engineering
Department's approval of said plans.
B. Receive the approval of the Watershed District.
C. Submit a landscaping/screening plan indicating the following:
1) A four-foot berm along Plaza Drive, with a six-foot wall
behind the berm with the berm having additional plantings in
order to screen the loading area.
2) Additional landscaping along Plaza Drive to match the
landscape theme planned along the east side of Plaza Drive.
D. Amend the site plan to indicate the following:
1) Extension of the sidewalk to the berm along Plaza Drive.
2) Lighting fixtures similar to those proposed on the site
located on the east side of Plaza Drive shall be used at the
entrances to Plaza Drive on the Menard's Shopping Center
property.
•
•
•
•
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #83-224
•
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF EDEN PRAIRIE CENTER 4TH
ADDITION FOR HOMART DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND TARGET
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
•
That the.preliminary plat of Eden Prairie Center 4th Addition for Homart Development
Corporation and Target, dated July 15, 1983, of 10.11 acres for a retail store for
Target, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance
1 with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and
amendments thereto, and is herein approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the day of
, 1983.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST: .
John D. Frane, City Clerk .
20I°1
Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes of August 22, 1983
Members Present: Acting Chairman Torjesen, Gartner, Johannes, Marhula, Schuck
E. TARGET. Request for Preliminary Plat of 10.11 acres for
• Feet-ITT store (Eden Prairie Center 4th Addition). Location:
Eden Prairie Center Mall. A public hearing.
Oale Hamilton, Suburban Engineering, representing proponents,
presented the request for the preliminary plat of Eden Prairie
Center 4th Addition, which would be the location of the recently
approved Target store at Eden Prairie Center.
Staff reviewed the recommendations of approval, including several
from the previous review of the site plan for the site.
Acting Chairman Torjesen asked for comments. and questions from
members of the audience. There were none.
MOTION 1:
Motion was made by Hallett, seconded by Schuck, to close the public
hearing.
Motion carried--5-0-0 I.
MOTION 2:
Motion was made by Hallett, seconded by Schuck,to recommend to the
City Council approval of the preliminary plat of Target (Eden
Prairie Center 4th Addition) based on plans dated July 15, 1983,
subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report of August 19,
1983.
Motion carried--5-0-0
rMinnesota
Department of Transportation
District 5
2055 No. Lilac Drive
of TO Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422.
September 2, 1983 (612)545-3761
•
Mr. Chris Enger
Director of Planning
Eden Prairie City Hall
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 •
S.P. 2744 T.H. 169/212
Plat review of proposed Target located
in part of Lot 3, Block 1,
Eden Prairie Center, Eden Prairie
Hennepin County
Dear Mr. Enger:
We are in receipt of the above referenced plat for our
review in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and
505.03 Plats and Surveys. We find the plat acceptable for
further development and do not anticipate any significant
adverse affect on the existing highway.
If you have any questions in regard to this review, please
contact Evan Green at 545-3761 ext. 119. Thank you for
your cooperation in this matter.
i. .
W. Cra� i ;'P.$
District Engineer r'
L
cc: Gerald Isaacs .
Metropolitan Council
Mike Reiter •
Hennepin County Surveyor's Office
•
WMC:bn
An Equal Opportunity Employs,
41110.®
aua.l .
STAFF REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
• FROM: Stephen Sullivan, Assistant City Planner
TOUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: August 19, 1983
PROJECT: Target
APPLICANT: Homart Corporation and Target, Inc.
FEE OWNER: Homart Development Corporation
LOCATION: Eden Prairie Center
REQUEST: Preliminary Plat of 10.1 acres for a retail store
Site Review •
The project has previously received site plan approval. The preliminary plat was
not a part of the site plan review. The proponent wishes to plat 10.1 acres west of
the existing Eden Prairie Center. The development does not meet minimum lot size,
side, or rear yard setbacks. The floor Area Ratio is 0.225, exceeding the 0.20
maximum allowable by City Code.
The boundaries of the platted area include a major entry off Highway #169, a portion
of the interior ring road, parking lot drives, and a section of parking lot #3 of
the Homart property. A reciprocal easement between Target and Homart to accommodate
the mutual use of one another's facilities is necessary.
The proposed Target store would provide 504 parking spaces within the platted area.
The total requirement for the Target store is 563 spaces. The balance of the spaces
not provided on the Target parcel will have to be accommodated through the use of
adjacent parking space within the Eden Prairie Center site.
A revised landscape plan reflecting the conditions set forth by the City Council
with the site plan approval is to be provided by the proponent. A letter of
commitment to screen the truck manuevering area, if truck parking were to occur,
shall also be provided to the City. The site plan does not indicate the enlargement
of the northwest planting bed along the north exposure of the building.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat for the Target development subject
to the following conditions:
Prior to building permit issuance, proponent shall:
Qo
i
Target Staff Report 2 August 19, 1983
a. Provide a revised landscape plan reflecting the necessary revision
set forth at the time of site plan review.
b. Enlarge the northwest planting area along the north exposure of the
building.
c. Provide a letter of comnitment to screen the truck manuevering area,
if truck parking were to occur.
d. Provide a mutual use easement and agreement between Homart and
Target for parking and access purposes.
e. Receive approval from the Board of Appeals for Floor Area Ratio,
minimum lot size, minimum zoned area, side and rear yard setback
variances.
•
•
MEMORANDUM
TO:' Mayor and City Council
Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
THRU: Carl Jullie, City Manager
•
FROM: Bob Lambert, Director of Community Services — V-—
. DATE: September 13, 1983
' SUBJECT: Round Lake Park Irrigation Extension
• In 1982, the City completed the installation of the irrigation system to the
Round Lake Park ballfields. This system is run off a 6" well located in Round
• Lake Park and is operated through an automatic time system.
The summer of 1983 gave a very good test to the irrigation system, since
the first of July through the end of August the summer was one of the hottest and
driest on record. The ballfields remained in good condition throughout this
extremely hot and dry period. The turf area that did not fair so well was the area
around the new park building. This area receives the most traffic within the park
due to the people coming from the beach to the concession stand and from the parking
lot to the picnic area. By early August, the turf in this entire area was com-
pletely brown and dormant.
• .
The Community Services Staff recommends that the irrigation line be 'extended from
field number 1 to irrigate the turf around the park building. This would include
the areas between the swimming beach and the park building and between the park
building and picnic area. Staff has received a quote from Aqua City Irrigation
for $4,660 and a quote from Green Keeper Lawn Sprinkler Co. for $4,980.
Community Services Staff recommend that the City proceed with this irrigation pro-
ject and award this project to Aqua City Irrigation for the amount of $4,660.
• Staff would recommend this project be funded through cash park fees.
BL:md
•
•
•
10,U
•
.i. `,,
1y •
•
•
•
• •
D .
•
/ . .
\\\:._
' -
•
•
.
H
\ •
• .
it
w
n .
-
------ 20a5
•
Propasal Pao.No. --- `\
•1 Peges
AQUA CITY IRRIGATION
5428 Nicollet Avenue • Minneapolis,Minnesota • 55419 Phone 827-2871
PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TOs a"o►a, Dom
8-16-83
NAAtr. aw NAAte.
City of Eden Praire Round Lake Park
stein. Steen,
8950 Eden Prairie Rd Valley View Rd and Fden_Prairie Rd
Clty. CITY. atAtr.
Eden Prairie Eden Prairie Minnesota
atAte.
Minnesota
We hereby submit specifications and estimates fors extending automatic irrigation system around recreation
area as per_our plan E-151
_ ___ We propose to tie into existing 3" main, run 2i" piping to building and
_..�_install valves and heads as shown using existing controllers for power.
The valves shall be as Rain-Birds EFA 150CP valves of all brass construction
with 24 volt solen'oids.The heads shall be as the existing heads which are the
___RSin7.13.1r. 4L.parl.circle_and_the itt fullS.ircle cast iron rotors with all brass_-,
— --_driv3ng.mechanire.
•
We hereby preemie le i,n.,A lob..end ainmI —,eesehe.o ern.seere sties lb.oh*.yMiksh.e..ter'he me Si. i'
Four Thousand Six Hundred Sixty and NO/100saura�4660.00 •
t with pelmet
yMmesh s,.e...
On Completion
AN..4rrl :. ewna.wd to ►• e, seesaws.All w.► N ►. .. pl...d a • .•rb..enlA. ...Me acme... S. .se.d.N p..,hwa. Aey
.N.n!ie,M A..ieli.e is..•►•w.y.s.ew'ies.i..N.i.y.ern stem.w,N be....es.d IWO.e•...nn..erNn,•M step hew.en ease.abe.
ewe•sd•bw•A.un•.l.. All.p..•.w",an...s..pM Web.,.•.ud.*N..d.l.y.beysad•er alnid.0.eer 10 any k..,•resb..d
libel•.owns.►ea.....,..as..e.b.n ere holly...epee by Wer...s.C•seeeswlese i..ottaAt..
Mlbs.ieed$1.. ,s (,r'�!Cl/—.�«-N•Gd—..s'•.•[`.
Nam lbb yrwat w be.iad».e by se e eel.,.e d law 60 •
+.r.
llrrrplance of Proposal
The above pricer,specifications and conditions are solislactory and ore hereby accepted.You are authorised to do the
work as specified.Payment will be made os outlined above.
•
Arrrpleb: n/'^� Signaler.
Dole __— _. Signature _��
�•:....•• QREENKEEPtrN
• .•• Lawn Sprinkler Co.
, \
•
MASTLM TORO INSTALLIM
V
• • •• ' • •' •• • • GREENKEEPER, I AUTOMATIC UNDERGROUND LAWN SYSTEMS
• • •
• • DESIGN•SALES•*isTALLATIDN•sem=
• • .• • •• • ' 7491 WESTGATE LA
••!...;•,•.' EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESO
64.14.38
.•••,..ti• i DAN LUSK
�� 1
' • 546.0436
•
September 1, 1983 '
Eden Prairie City Hall
$950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55344 •
ATTN: Steve Calhoun
RE: Addition to existing lawn sprinkler system at Round Lake Park
Dear Mr Calhoun,
•
We propose to provide labor and material for the installation of
the addition to the underground lawn irrigation system at the above
mentioned project.
The material for the installation will include but is not
necessarily limited to:
— 4 EPA 150 CP 24v electric remote control valves
— 11 Rainbird #41 full circle rotor
— 5 Rainbird 047 part circle rotor
— 24" PVC mainline as needed
All labor and material guaranteed to be free of defects for a •
period of one year from the date of installation.
Installed complete $4980.
Payment due on completion.
Accepted Date By
Sincerely, Y
k.
Greenkeeper, Inc. 1 '
•
•
Automatic Underground Lawn Systems • Dosign, Salos. Installation and Service
•
September 20, 1983
• •
CITY OF'EDEN PRAIRIE '
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 83-223
RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS
AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS FOR I.C. 52-035
WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council adopted the 21
dat of June
fixed the 19 day of July 19 83 as the
date for a public hearing on the following proposed improvements.
I.C. 52-035, Anderson Lakes Parkway Utility and Street Improvements.
•
• WHEREAS, ten days published notice of the Council hearing
through two weekly publications of the required notice was given
and the hearing was held on the 19 day of July+
at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an oppor-
tunity to be heard thereon,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE 1T RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF EDEN PRAIRIE:
1. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in the
Council resolution adopted the 20 day of September , 19 83 .
2. The City Engineer is hereby designated as the Engineer
for this project and is hereby directed to prepare plans
and specifications for the making of such improvement,
with the assistance of B.R.W.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on September 20, 19B3.
Wolfgang H. Penael,Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
John D. Frane, Clerk
*(And continued to September 20, 1983)
a0a7
•
• CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 83-225
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE
COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has prepared and adopted the Comprehensive
Municipal Plan ("Plan"); and,
WHEREAS, the Plan has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review
and comment; and,
WHEREAS, the proposal of Quality Homes for development of four eight-plexes,
totalling 32 units for mixed residential uses requires the amendment of the Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Eden Prairie,
Minnesota, hereby proposes the amendment of the Plan as follows: approximately four
acres, located north of Anderson Lakes Parkway and east of Center Way, be modified
from Church to Medium Density Residential.
ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this day of
, 1983.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
SEAL
2029
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #83-226
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AMENDMENT OF THE PRESERVE
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code provided for
the Planned Unit Development (PUD) of certain areas located•within the City; and,
WHEREAS, the Preserve Manor Homes is considered a proper amendment to the
Preserve PUD and the Comprehensive Guide Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on the
Preserve Manor Homes development and considered their request for approval for
development and recommended approval of the requests to the City Council; and,
i WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on 198 ;
NOW, THEREFORE, BY RESOLVED, by the City.Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota,
as follows:
1. The Preserve Manor Homes development amendment to the Preserve
Planned Unit Development being in Hennepin County, Minnesota, and
legally described as outlined in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made
a part hereof.
2. That the City Council does grant PUD Development Amendment approval
as outlined in the application material dated August 15, 1983.
3. That the PUD Development Amendment meets the recommendations of the
Planning Commission dated August 22, 1983.
ADOPTED by the City Council of Eden Prairie this day
of , 1982.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
•
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
111
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #83-227 •
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF PRESERVE MANOR HOMES
FOR QUALITY HOMES
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of Preserve Manor Homes for Quality Homes, dated August 8,
( 1983, of 4.0 acres for four eight-plexes, totalling 32 units, a copy of which is on
file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden
Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein
approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the day of
, 1983.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
2091 I`
Kathleen Krueger
11160 Anderson Lakes Parkway 11208
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
August 22, 1983
Eden Prairie City Offices
8950 :den Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344-2499
To Whom It May Concern:
Regarding the proposal to rezone the N. E. quadrant of Center
Way and Anderson Lakes Parkway, I would like to point out that this
neighborhood already has several multiple dwelling developments
and there are plans to add more. Is there really a need for more
units? Is the road system in the area adequate to handle the ever
increasing amount of traffic?
Yo truly
Kathleen D. rueg�
e
r•Lfl )\ f ' '
+ yr +T''` .,►.n. ..t.,..'4
' ��•' P ' 1 \ V
a, N.., i f Iti)x f •,,I,
•
a.
cc 'If'.
Ell \. '
'3 ,,,,i.027.t "(..••-: . ,,•-,s \L al °3 't .:' ` ......:::::,:•:';:.: •1;;'':::::::;;.:...1: & ." '', .
y, W `�K (.\ .frik
., V4. I, � ',�..y./.
pp I.
g.
.) ' ' lar..tn 1ug J.�.�. Y. t
ImoA.11
1 ` 1�
r a! O N O • !'�.. 'S1 •
�J \
=•.- oaa u a�f a `)., ro x E +p'1 tN01 f.
tppi>, C a ro :ElaJ++ O ap
S. E•I4 f i 3 at roV p0M'1 y-0ipC L .0 1Y.,,,4)1 .
Ill S.
-i
W.� L NfYQ� 0. aJ .VY\ t
.c E.--• OT .0
0 of•.- O II
• ofIin,.r C O of of O I 04,wL'CI a.,
CJf rmru A C I.Y- L. A 0 aaJ o cli 0.
ro4... 3 ar ..I v � w
M G .y o.- of v, i b aJ In ��
Coo acorn SA
o C cafo o
of S+J +•f v ro C4 1. \i + r ul q 's s.
L ul of N ` C �•+.c .
I.
CP t U N O f_1 d C Q c , \ �' % 0 of b0 4) ro ` ^ •j1
}' of>,I"4-- f.. of C C '_ �pC�r�\( C O N C ...
m tvl Cl.° v,rY ro 1 .� ro O.•C O ali C.• ]YCV\
0•IJ I. 0 i:•.-
p LI i 7 6L1 0 V • aJ ".4/ 1 O te. C • 0.
c c � � c ro�+ L. o I aJ .c • c
=I cr iv ,•- a o
a ata) a) m
� 0: > c, o� o � i�
W TJro+ c u
fT C Y. CI W.
Ca:: S !7W .�"N C� U .� QM V
CA ro .. Ten
CI
C'> C9.0 • (TIC't N c V. NO ~ Off N> A E O• of
[. en 1..1 a-f n C>1 of ro 7 O d N c '
p Q, `' O TJ V `\y
7 .o .� CO t_•O >dN JJ of I\ VO V, UC C C
> C1. •�M 111 a�•r- N a1 •r
�a+� �en c of J2 Q C at
l~..';..J I.. M�,ri^V.�+ ro iA " Otl v) C wt \ 1� (V N r e 'a/
•
v... " �,,,. C C 01 T p p .of • '\ ^ aJ ro Jr
C:l W W L •.,. C a,•.- L O :1 i0.- , •./�•+4-Y fU 0
V. U 1 W E ti 0' ..a .-f h u 4-•••• •a.
?-..... a...,
Tf I. -1 r^ Q •
c[ aJ•� {' of >f7 r
r':A F H.— N CJ.I U of.r U 10 yl ICI 7 1.r y
.J ..A� f'.�
f.f .. T n: XI-C" F.a.i of •... "a Ic.o • •C in•.-u N a il
0().RJ
STAFF REPORT •
TO: Planning Commission
• FRDM: Stephen Sullivan, Assistant City Planner
TiUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: August 26, 1983
PRDJECT: Preserve Manor Homes
APPLICANT: Quality Homes, Inc.
FEE OWNER: The Minnesota South District of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod
LOCATION: Northeast quadrant of Anderson Lakes Parkway. and Center Way
REQUESTS: 1. Guide Plan Amendment from Church to Medium Density
Residential
2. Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment
•
3. Planned Unit Development District Review
4. Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-2.5
5. Preliminary Platting of 4.04 acres
Background
The zoning is Rural and the Guide Plan depicts the parcel for a church land use.
The property is a component of the Preserve Planned Unit Development, which
designated the site for a church (See Figure #1 attached).
The site and immediate area, as intended by the Planned Unit Development, are to be
a part of the central node within the Preserve, serving a variety of housing types
with a school/park site, a community recreational center, church, and neighborhood
commercial uses.
Land Use
The proponent requests a Guide Plan change and a Planned Unit Development Amendment
from a church designation to a medium density residential land use. The gross
density proposed is 7.9 units per acre.
The proposal should be reviewed against the following:
1. Does the Preserve need additional multiple housing?
2. Does the plan offer a good transition to other land uses?
•
a05U
Preserve Manor Homes Staff Report 2 August 26, 1983
3. Would the change from a church land use to a medium density residential land
use benefit the Preserve and the Planned Unit Development?
The proposal would present no conflicts with regard to transition to adjacent land
' uses. The site has RM-2.5 to the east, west, and southeast. A park lies to the
north and a recreational center to the south. Westwind, a single family detached
residential development lies to the northwest. Buffering would be needed between
the existing low density residential and the proposed medium density residential.
These existing adjacent land uses are consistent with the intent of the "village
node" concept, providing a complimentary variety of land uses, housing types, park,
trails, recreation, and community facilities, centrally located within the Preserve
Planned Unit Development.
Eden Prairie has a population of 21,000 and currently supports twelve churches. The
Preserve has a population of approximately 6,000 and no churches. Two churches have
looked at the site and found that it did not meet their needs. The proponent has
submitted a letter explaining this.
Existing Site Character
A house and barn exist within the northern portion of the site. These structures
will be lost with development.
The parcel slopes from the north to the south along 10-16% slopes, draining to
Anderson Lakes Parkway.
Vegetation on site consists mostly of elm and cottonwood trees. One 30 inch oak and
three 12 inch pines exist within the central portion of the property. The elm,
cottonwood, and pine trees will be lost with development. The oak is proposed to be
saved, although the grading plan indicates a three-to-four foot cut adjacent to the
tree.
The soils are conducive to development.
Ordinance Requirements
The project meets or exceeds the City Code requirements for minimum lot size, lot
width, front yard setback, site area per dwelling unit, floor area ratio, and
maximum height of structure. The proponent wishes to subdivide the parcel into five
lots. This is necessary to meet FHA requirements for minimum percentage of units
being sold prior to the closing on the individual property. Based on this
subdivision, variances will be needed for minimum lot depth, side yard setback, and
rear yard setback. Lots 1-4 do not have direct frontage on a public road because of
a small Preserve Association outlot, which is located between the proposed lots and
the adjacent public roads.
The developer has shown one enclosed parking space per unit. Nineteen additional
parking stalls are provided off the interior private road. Since all single car
garages are provided, the parking space behind the garages obstructs the garage
space. Staff suggests that the spaces behind the garage be counted at the rate of
one-half space each. The total number of parking spaces is 67, exceeding the Code
requirement.
Preserve Manor Homes Staff Report 3 August 26, 1983
A landscape plan has been submitted. Additional evergreen plant material and/or
berming is needed to screen the Westwind single family development from the site.
The parking areas should also be screened from the adjacent public streets.
Revisions to the landscape plan are necessary.
Site Plan
Access to the parcel is off Center Way. A private drive will serve the four
buildings. The private drive crosses a narrow strip of Preserve Association
. property before linking to Center Way.
The entire site will be graded. Filling up to six feet is proposed within the south
portion of the site. Cuts up to seven feet are proposed within the north half of
the parcel. Berms are shown at the entrance, adjacent to Prairie Lakes Condominiums
and between Lots 1 and 2.
The site will maintain the north to south drainage, with a majority of the storm
water being collected by catch basins located at the south end of the private drive.
Some off-site drainage will occur. It will be necessary to add a catch basin at the
entrance to receive storm water that would drain onto Center Way. Water service
ties to a main along Center Way following the private drive, then loops back to the
existing main. Sanitary sewer is proposed to tie into a 15 inch sewer main, which
lies adjacent to the east boundary.
An eight foot bituminous trail exists along both Center Way and Anderson Lakes
Parkway. Sections of eight foot wide bituminous paths exist on the site in the
northwest and northeast portions of the property. A pedestrian underpass exists
south of the parcel, tying the Preserve Community/Recreation Center to the adjacent
properties.
RECOMMENDATIONS
If the Planning Commission feels the Guide Plan change and Planned Unit Development
Amendment are substantiated, the Planned Unit Development District and Zoning
District change, and Preliminary Plat, could be approved, subject to the following:
1. Prior to City Council review, the proponent shall:
a. Revise the utility plan, placing a catch basin at the drive entrance
to the property.
b. Revise the landscape plan, buffering the existing Westwind
development from the proposed manor homes.
c. Submit detailed information regarding the treatment and preservation
of the existing 30 inch oak.
•
2. Prior to final plat, proponent shall:
a. Receive an easement agreement from the Preserve Association allowing
an access drive to the property over the existing outlot.
b. Place a ten foot wide trail easement over the existing bituminous
au36
Preserve Manor Homes Staff Report 4 August 26, 1983
paths, which lie within the northeast and northwest sections of the
parcel.
. c. Place a utility easement over the existing sanitary sewer line along
the east property line.
• d. Meet with the Engineering Department regarding water, sanitary and
storm sewer.
e. Receive Watershed District approval.
k/\J 2
' ''.)-Aries vied •
it
`I 1. s.....ai'u.1e«. S. l
1 /
OleiWOO CO
. Ad011weed: % 7
� ` s r I 1` +NW W
-'' . 2 -1 _ 7,..71,-.-,-...2,:e,,,,,..\‘‘,‘ —
/--- .,„., ,,..., Prt
\\
FIGURE 1
ao3'1
•
•
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
•
RESOLUTION #83-228
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF MONTESSORI SCHOOL
FOR RYAN CONSTRUCTION
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
( That the preliminary plat of Montessori School for Ryan Construction, dated August
15, 1963' of 0.75 acres for a day care facility, a copy of which is on file at the
City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie
Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the day of
, 1983.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
•
John D. Frane, City Clerk
�o�B
Unapproved Planning Commission Minutes of August 22, 1983
Members Present: Acting Chairman Torjesen, Gartner, Johannes, Marhula, Schuck
D. MONTESSORI SCHOOL, by Ryan Development/Hustad Development.
Request for Zoning from Regional Commercial to Regional
• Commercial Service and preliminary Plat of 0.75 acre for day
care facility. Location: County Road #60 and Market Place
Drive. A public hearing.
Mr. Bob Ryan, Ryan Development, presented the request and explained
the proposal as it related to the surrounding properties.
Staff reviewed the recommendations of the Staff Report.
Marhula stated that the grades of the parking lot were more steep
than necessary and suggested lessening the grades. Mr. Ryan stated
that they would do so.
Acting Chairman Torjesen asked for comments and questions from
members of the audience. There were none.
MOTION 1:
Motion was made by Marhula, seconded by Schuck, to close the public
• hearing.
Motion carried--5-0-0
•
MOTION 2:
Motion was made by Marhula, seconded by Schuck, to recommend to the
City Council approval of the request of Ryan Development for a
Montessori School for zoning from Regional Commercial to Regional
Commercial Service, for a day care facility on 0.75 acres, based on
plans and written materials dated August 15, 1983, and subject to
the recommendations of the Staff Report dated August 19, 1983.
Motion carried--5-0-0
MOTION 3:
Motion was made by Marhula, seconded by Schuck, to recommend to the
City Council approval of the request of Ryan Development for a
Montessori School for preliminary plat of 0.75 acres for a day care
facility, based on plans and written materials dated August 15,
1983, and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated
August 19, 1983.
Motion carried--5-0-0
a0`39
15— DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION320 Washington Av. South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 \• -''.
HENNEPIN
J ._ 935-3381 August 26, 1983
Mr. Chris Enger
Director of Planning
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 •
Dear Mr. Enger:
RE Proposed Plat- "Montessori School" •
CSAH 39 SE Quadrant Market Place Drive
Section 11, Township 116, Range 22 '
Hennepin County No. 1116
Review and Recanmendations
Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03, Plats and Surveys, require County review of
proposed plats abutting County roads. We reviewed the above plat and found it ac-
ceptable with consideration of these conditions:
-For upgrading of CSAH 39 the developer should dedicate an additional 27 feet of
right of way making the right of way 60 feet frau the center of CSAH 39.
-All access must be via Market Place Drive as show:. No direct access to this plat
from CSAH 39 will be allowed by Hennepin County.
-All proposed construction within County right of way requires an approved utility
permit prior to beginning construction. This includes but is not limited to,
drainage and utility construction, trail development, and landscaping. See our
Maintenance Division for utility permit forms.
-The developer must restore all areas disturbed during construction within County
right of way.
Please direct any response or questions to Les Weigelt.
Sincerely,
id4
„dames M. Wald, P.E.
Chief, Planning and Programing
JMq/LOW:pl '
HENNEPIN COUNTY
on equal opportunity employer
aogO
STAFF REPORT
•
TO: Planning Commission
• FROM: Stephen Sullivan, Assistant City Planner
THROUGH: Chris Enger, Director of Planning
DATE: August 19, 1983
PROJECT: Montessori School
' LOCATION: East of Market Place Drive, South of Valley View Road
APPLICANT: Ryan Development-Hustad Development
FEE OWNER: Eden Prairie Land Company II •
REQUESTS: 1. Zoning District change from Regional Commercial to Regional
Commercial Service
2. Preliminary plat of approximately 0.75 acres for a day care
facility
Background
The Guide Plan depicts a Regional Commercial use for the site. The parcel is
currently zoned Regional Commercial.
Land Use •
The property is a component of the Bryant Lake Planned Unit Development, which
designates this area for office, retail, or service type land uses. The
availability of an educational/day care facility would provide a retail service to
the adjacent office, industrial, commercial, and residential developments.
Existing Site Character
The site is bordered to the north by County Road #60, to the west by Lake Ridge
Office Park, to the east by a vacant five-acre parcel, and to the south by Bryant
Lake Business Center.
The parcel slopes at a 15% grade from the southeast to the northwest corner with a
20 ft. vertical drop. Storm water flows to a ditch section located on the south
side of County Road #60, which eventually outlets to Bryant Lake.
Meadow grasses cover the parcel, offering insignificant wildlife value. The soils
are conducive for development.
•
Ordinance Requirements
The project meets or exceeds the requirements for minimum lot size, lot width, lot
aoul
Montessori School Staff Report 2 August 19, 1983
depth, front yard setback, rear yard setback, side yard setbacks, height of
structure, and Floor Area Ratio.
The corner lot provision has been implemented by placing parking within one-half of
the front yard setback along County Road #60.
The proposal provides 23 parking spaces, which meets the needs of the Montessori
School. In the event that the building is sold and additional parking is needed,
the playground area would be converted to a parking lot. Staff estimates that only
6-7 additional parking stalls could be gained with the conversion. This could
• accommodate the parking requirement for an office use, but not a retail use.
Berms are to be located along County Road #60 to provide screening from the proposed
parking area. It will be necessary for these berms to be planted with evergreen
trees to completely screen the sight lines projected from County Road #60.
Additional screening will be needed along Market Place Drive and south of the
parking area. The ten foot green strip to the south provides a minimal amount of
space to screen with evergreen trees; therefore, a fence may be necessary.
The rooftop mechanical equipment is to be screened with a diagonal, slatted wood
enclosure, matching the wood portions of the proposed building.
No service, loading, or trash container areas are indicated.
Site Plan
Access to the parcel is proposed off Market Place Drive. The volume of traffic
generated from the school can be handled by the surrounding road system. No public
pedestrian paths are proposed.
The parcel will be graded completely with an eight foot cut in the southeast and an
eight foot fill in the northwest. The proposal indicates grading off-site on the
vacant parcel to the south. Erosion control measures are proposed along the County
Road #60 ditch section.
A majority of the site drains into Market Place Drive, inletting to a catch basin 80
feet north of the access drive. Water and sanitary sewer will tie to an existing
main located within the adjacent streets.
The exterior material of the building is to be mostly brick, with some cedar and
glass.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends approval of the Montessori School request for rezoning to Regional
Commercial Service and preliminary plat, subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to Council review, proponent shall revise the site.plan indicating the
location and treatment for screening of the trash receptacle area. Also,
proponent shall submit a landscape/screening plan which screens all parking,
loading, service, and mechanical areas.
2. Prior to final plat, proponent shall:
aow2
Montessori School Staff Report 3 August 19, 1983
a. Meet with the Engineering Department with regard to water, sanitary
sewer, and storm water drainage. All storm water shall be caught
on-site.
• 3. Prior to Building Permit issuance, proponent shall:
a. Submit a letter to the City from the property owner to the south,
stating approval for off-site grading on that property owner's
parcel.
b. Receive Watershed District approval.
c. Present a signage plan consistent with City Code.
d. Pay the required Cash Park Fee.
•
e. Meet with the Fire Marshall regarding fire safety requirements.
•
•
ao43
SEPTEMBER 20,1983 •
9 ' VOID OUT CHECK 1050.00-
5, J HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE-DISTRICT 1 UTILITIES 240.76
9651 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE FOR FALL BROCHURE 623.84
9652 SUPPLEES 7 HI ENTERPRISES SEPTEMBER RENT 3470.73
9653 COMMUNITY DANCE CENTER INSTRUCTOR-EXERCISE CLASSES/FEES,PAID 300.00
9654 SUPER VALU STORES INC EASEMENT-PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE 7800.00
9655 PAUSTIS & SONS WINE 123.00
9656 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC LIQUOR 2135.14
9657 EAGLE WINE CO WINE 274.85
9658 TWIN CITY WINE CO WINE 327.75
9659 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO LIQUOR 3241.12
9660 JOHNSON BROTHERS WHOLESALE LIQUOR 1539.83
9661 INTERCONTINENTAL PACKAGING CO WINE 886.34
9662 OLD PEORIA COMPANY INC LIQUOR 1062.74
9663 NORTHCO LTD SEPTEMBER RENT 3371.73
9664 FIAM CONFERENCE-FIRE DEPT 75.00
9665 WAYZATA POLICE DEPARTMENT CONFERENCE-POLICE DEPT 45.00
9666 NORWEST BANK OF HOPKINS PAYROLL 9/2/83 129.00
9667 INSTY-PRINTS PRINTING-SUNBONNET DAYS FLYERS 20.05
9668 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK PAYROLL 9/2/83 16078.46
9669 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE PAYROLL 9/2/83 9080.91
9670 AETNA LIFE INSURANCE PAYROLL 9/2/83 108.00
9671 MINNESOTA STATE RETIREMENT PAYROLL 9/2/83 65.00
9672 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE PAYROLL 9/2/83 3007.00
9673 UNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS PAYROLL.9/2/83 71.50
' 1 INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING DUES 532.00
5......, PERA PAYROLL 9/2/83 14396.26
9676 HOLIDAY INN DOWNTOWN CONFERENCE-WATER DEPT 120.84
9677 NORTH CENTRAL SECTION AWWA REGISTRATION FEE-WATER DEPT 80.00
9678 HOPKINS POSTMASTER POSTAGE 4000.00
9679 VOID OUT CHECK 0.00
9680 SANDY WERTS SUN8ONNET DAYS CHANGE FUND 100.00
96B1 OLD PEORIA COMPANY INC LIQUOR 1714.65
9682 INTERCONTINENTAL PACKAGING CO WINE 2999.41
9683 ED PHILLIPS & SONS CO LIQUOR 3505.01
9684 TWIN CITY WINE CO WINE 1007.99
9685 EAGLE WINE CO WINE 114.19
9686 JOHNSON BROTHERS WHOLESALE LIQUOR 2304.85
9687 GRIGGS COOPER & CO INC LIQUOR 3743.03
9688 WESTERN LIFE INSURANCE INSURANCE 626.36
9689 MEDCENTER HEALTH PLAN INSURANCE 3275.60
9690 BLUE CROSS INSURANCE INSURANCE 962.23
9691 PHYSICIANS HEALTH PLAN INSURANCE 9322.77
9692 NICOLLET EITEL HEALTH INSURANCE 584.15
9693 GROUP HEALTH PLAN INSURANCE 1926.56
9694 STATE OF MINNESOTA BIKE REGISTRATIONS/FEES PAID 3.00
9695 LONNIE GRAY REFUND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 281.64
9696 HENNEPIN COUNTY REGISTRAR OF TITL AGREEMENT REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 67.00
9697 HOTSY EQUIPMENT CO SWITCH-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 30.00
9698 RADISSON DULUTH HOTEL EXPENSES-COMMUNITY CENTER 99.90
9 DAANE GRAMBLING REFUND-EXERCISE CLASSES 11.00
).JO BEER WHOLESALERS INC BEER 8030.71
9701 CITY CLUB DISTRIBUTING COMPANY BEER 5486.16 I
9702 COCA COLA BOTTLING CO MIXES 839.64
9703 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO BEER 7436.39
i
12662911
9704 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE CO BEER 11776.00
9'-- KIRSCH DISTRIBUTING BEER 273.17
9. A 'J OGLE INC BEER 1652.90
9707 PEPSI-COLA BOTTLING CO MIXES 1055.90
9708 ROYAL CROWN BEVERAGE CO MIXES 29.50
9709 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY BEER 11126.05
9710 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE AUGUST SALES TAX 10660.01
9711 ACRO-MINNESOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 805.08
9712 AMERICAN LINEN SUPPLY CO MOPS-LIQUOR STORE 8.85
9713 EARL F ANDERSEN & ASSOCAITES INC STREET SIGNS 432.55
9714 APPLE VALLEY RED-E-MIX INC CONCRETE 74.63
9715 ASSOCIATED ASPHALT INC BLACKTOP 2821.62
9716 THOMAS G BLAZINA AUGUST MILEAGE-BUILDING DEPT 81.00
9717 BRYAN ENGINEERING TESTING INC -ROADK R GE Y AK 4377.95
VIEW ROAD
AND PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE
9718 BROWN PHOTO FILM PROCESSING-POLICE/FIRE & PLANNING DPT 102.59
9719 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC ROCK 4335.85
9720 BUSINESS FURNITURE INC 8 TABLES-PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING 1869.45
9721 BUTCHS BAR SUPPLY SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 171.55
9722 CHAP IN PUBLISHING COMPANY LEGAL ADS 180.00
9723 CHANHASSEN BUMPER TO BUMPER _HEADS/STARTER/DISTRIBUTORU ENGINE 3378.17
CAPS/WHEEL
-CYLINDER/SPARK PLUGS/BRAKE ROTOR/AIR
-FILTER/FUEL HOSES/BRAKE SHOES/PLUG WIRES/
-EXHAUST/POWER STEERING FLUID/BELTS/WATER
PUMP/GASKETS
1 A CHASE BRACKETT COMPANY APPRAISAL OF EDENDALE RETIREMENT-PLANNING 400.00
9725 CLUTCH & U-JOINT BURNSVILLE INC HOSES 53.97
9726 COPY EQUIPMENT INC TAPE/PAINT 235.62
9727 COUNTRY CLUB MARKET INC SUPPLIES 49.3S
9728 CAROLINE CUMMINGS SERVICE-SORT FALL BROCHURES 10.00
9729 CUTLER-MAGNER COMPANY QUICKLIME-WATER DEPT 3540.44
9730 WARD F DAHLBERG SEPTEMBER EXPENSES 80.00
9731 EUGENE DIETZ AUGUST EXPENSES 165.00
9732 DRISKILLS SUPER VALU SUPPLIES-COMMUNITY CENTER/RECREATION DEPT 425.49
9733 JOY A EASTMAN AUGUST MILEAGE 19.85
9734 MARKS EDEN PRAIRIE STANDARD ANTIFREEZE-STREET DEPT 11.90
9735 EDEN PRAIRIE TRASHTRONICS AUGUST TRASH SERVICE 280.00
9736 ELK RIVER CONCRETE PRODUCTS GRATE-DRAINAGE 99.00
9737 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC BOOTS-WATER DEPT 47.75
9738 EMERGENCY SERVICE SYSTEMS INC REWIRE BATTERY SWITCHING SYSTEM-SQUAD CARS 159.8E
9739 ENERGY-SAVING PRODUCTS CEILING FANS-PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING 250.00
9740 CHRIS ENGER AUGUST EXPENSES 165.03
9741 CURT FINCH SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 12.00
9742 FARMERS STEEL CO IRON-PARK MAINTENANCE 77.00,
9743 FINLEY BROS ENTERPRISES INSTALL CRACK FILLER-ROUND LAKE TENNIS CTS 653.7E
9744 FIRESTONE STORES 6 TIRES-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 742.86
9745 JAN FLYNN SUPPLIES & STORAGE CABINET-SENIOR CENTER 71.24
9746 STUART FOX CONFERENCE-FORESTRY DEPT 130.8
9747 JOHN FRAISER HOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 36.03
"48 JOHN FRANE SEPTEMBER EXPENSES 173.C•_;
./49 G & K SERVICES TOWELS/JACKETS 93.60
9750 GLIDDEN PAINT PAINT-PARK MAINTENANCE 117.85
6331505
26u(0
9751 GLW DISTRIBUTING •SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORES 56.58
9752 GUNNAR ELECTRIC COMPANY INC ELECTRICAL WORK-PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING 176.37
REBECCA PLOWMAN HAHN TENNIS INSTRUCTOR-FEES PAID 17.00
S_. HARMON GLASS WINDSHIELD-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 164.04
9755 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER TRAFFIC SIGNALS-VALLEY VEIW & COUNTY RD 4 11074.03
9756 HOPKINS DODGE SALES INC FILTERS/IGNITION SWITCH 57.44
9757 HOPKINS PARTS CO PIPE/FILTERS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 48.16
975B INGRAM EXCAVATING -HAUL DIRT-WILLOWOOD PARK/BALL PARKS/ 3236.50
• HIGH TRAIL ESTATES
9759 IRON MOUNTAIN FORGE CO 2 STEEL BIKE RACKS-PARK MAINTENANCE 571.82
9760 JUSTUS LUMBER COMPANY LUMBER-COMMUNITY CENTER 12D.90
9761 KARULF HARDWARE INC -KEYS/BATTERY CHARGER/BATTERIES/PAINT 1333.37
-BRUSHES/TAPE/SILVERWARE/LIGHT BULBS/ROPE
-POTHOLDERS/BOLTS & NUTS/TARP/FUNNELS/PIPE
-TAPE/MOTOR OIL/PLASTIC BAGS/WIRE/ELECTRIC
PLUGS/CONNECTORS
9762 KRAEMERS HOME CENTER -VALVE/ADHESIVE/TUBING/BOARDS-NOT AVAIL- 155.37
A9763 KATHRYN A KOCHLIN MILEAGE 26.00
9764 LAKE STATE EQUIPMENT CO CLAMPS/RINGS/VALVE-PARK MAINTENANCE 573.64
9765 LAND CARE & EQUIPMENT CO 4 WHEELS-PARK MAINTENANCE 145.11
9766 LANDCO EQUIPMENT INC INSTALL NEW CENTER LINK/PINS/SEAT-FORESTRY 555.62
9767 LINHOFF COLOR PHOTO LABORATORY FILM PROCESSING-PLANNING DEPT 19.50
9768 LOGIS AUGUST SERVICE 3744.13
9769 LOWELLS AUTOMOTIVE SPECIALISTS PAINT/SANDPAPER/BODY PUTTY-P/W BUILDING 411.33
9770 LYMAN LUMBER COMPANY LUMBER-PARK MAINTENANCE 36.58
9771 DEBBY LYNGDAL EXPENSES-COMMUNITY SERVICES 25.95
( '2 MANPOWER INC TEMPORARY HELP-PLANNING DEPT 244.00
.3 MATTS AUTO SERVICE INC TOWING SERVICES 25.00
9774 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMIS AUGUST SAC CHARGES 64374.75
4374.75
9775 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORPORATION BLACKTOP 16.44
9776 MINNESOTA GAS COMPANY SERVICE
9777 METRO FONE COMMUNICATIONS INC SEPTEMBER PAGER RENTAL 89.52
9778 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMM OCTOBER SEWER SERVICE 46795.27
9779 MODERN TIRE CO WHEEL ALIGNMENT/FLOOR MATS 67.9D
9780 EARL MORE SUNBONNET DAY SIGNS 85.00
97B1 NATIONAL CHEMSEARCH CHEMICALS-WATER DEPT 832.30 6
9782 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY SERVICE 3847.041
9783 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO SERVICE
97B4 NORWEST BANK MINNEAPOLIS NA BDND
MILEAGEAYMENT 140630.0530. 5
9785 MARK PANNKUK
9786 PATCO COMPANY 10 TRAFFIC CONES/10 LIGHTS-WATER DEPT 229.00
9787 MIKE PAUL ELECTRIC INC EMERGENCY-MODIFY
WILDWELDINGWOUTLETS/INSTALL 4 1078.64
9788 W G PEARSON INC SAND-STREET DEPT 17.76
9789 CONNIE L PETERS MILEAGE 11.50
9790 PRECISION BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC REPAIR POSTAGE MACHINE-CITY HALL 48.00
9791 R & R SPECIALTIES INC SHARPEN ZAMBONI BLADES-COMMUNITY CENTER 66.50
9792 DAVID RAQUET SOCKET WRENCHES-STREET DEPT 18.70
9793 RIEKE-CARROLL-MULLER ASSOCIATES I _SERVICE-WESTWOOD ODCINDIPAND RK/HOMEWARD HHILLS S 33805.05
-RYMARLAND CAMP 3RD ADDITION/LAVONNE IND
-PARK/FEASIBILITY REPORT MITCHELL ROAD/
PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE
32458555
2Ota
9794 SAILORADS-LIQUOR STORES 27.00
KNSALENTINE
NEWSPAPERS INC SANDERSHOCKEY OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 24.00
97�' WI CONFERENCE-BUILDING DEPT 10.00
9; WAYNE
9797 SATELLITE INDUSTRIES INC .D0
PORTABLE10 RESTROOMS-PARK DEPT 1185.61
9798 KEVIN W SCHMEIG CONFERENCE-BUILDING DEPT 1O.00
9799 MICHAEL SEDESKY FLOWERS-COMMUNITY SERVICES
25
9800 SHAKOPEE FORD INC -BRAKE SHOES/ALIGN FRONT END TIRES-SQUAD 98.55
CARS 7.00
9801 STEVE SINELL EXPENSES-ASSESSING DEPT 9802 W GORDON SMITH CO -GASKET/STARTER/REGULAR GASOLINE/BELTS/ 4137.00
-FUEL PUMP/COIL/SWITCH/HOSES/ANTIFREEZE/
SPARK PLUGS .1167
9803 SON OF A PRINTER INC PRINTING FOR OPEN HOUSE INVITATIONS 2 11 .67
9804 SOUTH HENNEPIN HUMAN SERVICES COU 1/2 OF 1983 FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTION 665.0
00
98D5 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING INC A CAR LIQUR STORES UO 2
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 41.60
9806 STANDARD NTEIPG COMPANY SUPPLIES-LIQUOR STORE 3.74
9808 CARRIER ENTERPRISES INC 47.25
9808 CARRIE TIETZ SERVICE-PARK & RECREATION MINUTES
98D9 TURF SUPPLY COMPANY TURF BUILDER/400 BAGS FERTILIZER-PARK DEPT 9002 0.00
1
9810 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO OXYGEN-WATER DEPT 217. 1
9811 TWIN CITY PRICING & LABEL INC LABELS-LIQUOR 218.35
5
9813 CRAIG
VESSCOAIG VICK INC SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 66.00
9814 JIM WALTER PAPERS XEROX PAPER-CITY HALL628.75
628. 5
9815 WATER PRODUCTS COMPANY 3-1" METERS/ONE 1-1/4" METERS 5 .50
9816 WESTERN IRRIGATION INC EQUIPMENT PARTS-PARK MAINTENANCE .46
ff 7 XEROX CORPORATION SERVICE 1 595.51
1 .8 ZIEBART AUTO RUSTPROOFING-PARK MAINTENANCE 3125.65
00
9819 FIRST STATE BANK OF CPRING SERVICE-ESERVICE-RYMARL'ANDENVALE BLVD CAMP 3RD ADDITION 19715.35
9820 G L L CONTRACTINGAI INCC SERVICE-HOMEWARD HILLS ROAD 13716.56
98212 GF F JEDLICKI INC C SERVICE-COUNTY ROAD 67 7839.88
9823 F F ARDLKNU I SERVICE-VALLEY VIEW ROAD 360298.08
9823 RI CHARD KNUTSON INC 15050.85
9824 MIDWESTNNKO PAVING & RECYCLINGI INC SERVICE-CREEKRIDSERVICE-CARDINAL 3RD ADDITION 26580.72
9826 EXCAVATINGOSR INC SERVICE-PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE 129930.85
9826 NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION CO SERVICE-LAVONNE INDUSTRIAL PARK 113876.9S
98278 NORTHDALE CONSTRUCTION CO SERVICE-WESTWOOD INDUSTRIAL PARK 27179.73
9829 & SONS CONSTRUCTIONNC CO SERVICE-LORENCE IST & 2ND ADDITION 49826.53
98293 ORFEI &CONTRACTING SERVICE-AUTUMN WOODS ADDITION 3136.00
9831 0 & P INC17438.67
9831 PROGRESSIVE CONTRACTORS INC SERVICE-PRAIRIE CENTERVDRI�VEITCHELL ROAD 55632.33
9832 SHAFER CONTRACTING CO INC SERVICE-PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE 510238.93
9833 SHAFERASPHALT CONTRACTINGA CO INC 35504.53
9B345 IA PAVING MATERIALS INC -PHONEE EQUIPMENT LFOR EMERGENCY OPERATING 1035.00
9B35 AMERICAN BELL CENTER-PDLICE DEPT
NOTARY FEE-POLICE DEPT 5.00
9837 MOLLYRIRD -AIR CONDITIONER COMPRESSOR REPLACEMENT 937.48
9837 BOULEVARD SHEET METAL & HTG AND REPAIR-FIRE STATION
TABLES/2 FILES-P/S & P/W BUILDING 641.3C
9838 BUSINESS FURNITURE INC 13 FIRE HELMETS 962.00
9B39 CONWAYN UIBE & TAMPTC INC NOTARY STAMP-POLICE DEPT 18.15
401 CROWN RUBBER STAMP CO77.32 .
s41 DALCO CLEANING SUPPLIES-POLICE DEPT 243.A5i
9842 DORHOLT PRINTING/STATIONERY INC OFFICE SUPPLIES
i
141265763
aota
•
9843 EDEN INN • CANINE TRAINING-POLICE DEPT 63.38
9844 EMERGENCY SERVICE SYSTEMS INC LIGHTS-POLICE DEPT 117.96
9 EMPIRE-CROWN AUTO INC EQUIPMENT PARTS-POLICE DEPT 14.07 .
GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS INC EQUIPMENT REPAIRS-EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 118.12
9847 HEEBINK LUMBER & MILLWORK INC FORMICA FOR COMMUNICATIONS ROOM-P/S BLDG 1D9.20
9848 SHERIFFS DEPT-CTY OF HENN JUNE BOOKING FEES 126.98
9849 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER JULY BOARD OF PRISONERS 2916.75
9850 CARL J JULLIE EXPENSES 36.74
9851 LESTERS REFUND-BUILDING DEPT 27.00
9852 LEEF BROS INC RUG SERVICE 391.54
9B53 MCGLYNN BAKERIES INC OPEN HOUSE REFRESHMENTS 66.62
9B54 MEDICAL OXYGEN & EQUIP CO OXYGEN-FIRE DEPT 44.33
9855 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC CO-OP SERVICE 35.25
9B56. NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY SERVICE 5.00
9857 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO SERVICE 395.90
9B58 TOM PETERSON SOFTBALL OFFICIAL/FEES PAID 12.00
9859 SEARS ROEBUCK & CO -8 COVERALLS/DRILL/4 DRAWER TOOL CHEST/ 2035.14
VISE/TOOLS/STOVE/REFRIGERATOR
9B60 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING INC LEGAL ADS 1042.22
9133 VOID OUT CHECK 25.00-
75332D
$1934720.54
•
ac,u9
September 20, 1983
1' L•EfIEF:AL 126352.42
I. CEP.TIFICATE OF IIJIEETEDIJE 163. 00
15 LIGUCR STORE P V M 54286.67
17 LIQUOR STORE PRESERVE 36535. 91
30 CASH TARE FEES 38221 56
33 UTILITY BOND FUND 21558. 44
36 PIS 6 P/W BUILDING 6OND 6121.83
43 77 FIRE DEBT FUND 60309. 40
44 UTILIT:• IEE•T FUND 80320.65
51 IMPROVEMENT CONSTRUCTION 276872. 56
57 ROAD IIIPRCVE CONST FUND 26512.70
73 WATER FUND 67 39. 72
77 'SEWER FUND 112032.17
El TRUST & ESCROW FUND 721. 22
90 TAX IIJCREMEIIT 1063E51.99
11934720 54
i .
aosU
SEP8
1983
Northern States Power Company
MaRP September 6, 1983
Minnetonka Division
5505 County Road 19
P.O.Box 10
Excelsior,Minnesota 55331
Honorable Mayor and City Council Telephone(612)474.9881
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
- Eden Prairie, MN 55344
RE: Conversion of NSP Owned Street Lights
to High Pressure Sodium
Earlier this year, NSP initiated a program for conversion of all NSP owned
street lights to energy efficient high pressure sodium lamps. NSP developed
this program to reduce the number of inefficient street lights on its system,
in line with NSP's and the national commitment to energy conservation.
Because of recent reductions in the cost of high pressure sodium fixtures
supplied to NSP, we are now able to make the street light conversion program
even more attractive to you. This cost-reduction has occurred due to a
nationwide movement toward the use of this new, efficient light source,
resulting in mass production of the high pressure sodium equipment at lower
{ costs.
Correspondingly NSP, on September 8th, is filing with the Minnesota and
South Dakota Public Utilities Commissions and the North Dakota Public Service
Commission a rate request to lower its rates for high pressure sodium street
lights so that they are the same as those now charged for mercury street
lighting of equivalent light output. We have also filed with these Commissions
to eliminate the $5.00 mercury-to-high pressure sodium conversion charge. The
filings also include a request that the mercury street light rate be closed
and no longer be offered for new installations.
After we receive the Commissions' approval, NSP will start converting NSP
owned mercury, incandescent, and fluorescent street lights to new energy
efficient high pressure sodium at no charge for the conversion.
This means that NSP will now be updating our street lights to modern, more
efficient fixtures at no additional cost to you while conserving energy at
the same time. The converted lamps will use 33% to 55% less energy and
provide 17% to 33% more light output than the lamps they replace, depending
on lamp size. In the future, as NSP's costs of producing electric energy
rise, the converted street lights should provide you savings in monthly
operating costs compared to the relatively inefficient mercury units we are
presently using.
Because of these many advantages of high pressure sodium street lighting,
NSP plans to convert the NSP owned overhead and custom underground street
lights in your city to the nearest equivalent light output high pressure
sodium. This will always result in slightly more light on your streets.
ao51
•
•
•
- 2 -
Because this will be a large conversion program (NSP owns more than
70,000 street lights), and because of the necessity of scheduling this
conversion work to match available crew time and minimize costs, NSP
may not be able to make the conversion when you request it, and will
have to schedule the work over several years. Any mercury street lights
that require maintenance during this waiting period will be converted to
high pressure sodium at no charge. •
•
Provided the respective commissions approve NSP's filing, NSP will begin
converting NSP owned mercury, incandescent and fluorescent street lights
to the high pressure sodium at no charge for the conversion, provided
the conversions are made according to NSP's schedule. If conversion is
desired prior to NSP's schedule, a one-time charge of $20 per light will
be assessed to cover NSP's additional costs.
We request your written concurrence with this program.
•
If you have any questions or need further information on this program,
• contact Marlow E. Peterson at 474-7133
NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY
7eX71.
Division General Manager
•
•
ao52
POPHAM, HAIK, SCHNOBRICH, KAUFMAN & Dons LTD.
4344 IDS CENTER
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
• TtLt.HONC AND It LECOPKR
6,2.333-4600
2e60►CTRO•LCWIS TOWER
WAYNC G.PD HAIR THOMAS K. BROWN LEE C GILLSSHEC T TIT SEVENTEENTH STREET
ROGER▪ D S HAIR THOMAS R.BERG LESLIE L LLNILATTE DENVER.COLORADO 80202
DNVRLV AUFMAN wICH EC D. ENSON R ROBERT
C.
OILAN TtLCPHONE AND TELEGRAM.*
DENVERID COTY N JAMES R.STEILENOCK DOBLwT EOOIJIST CN 303-826.2660
DAVID S.OOTv JAMES B.LOCRHART DAVID J.EDOVIST
N OSERT A.MINISH ALLEN W HINDERARER CATHERINE A.POLASRY N.W
SUITE SOD P000 L 8
ROLFC A.WORO[N OLILORD M.GREENE SILVAN G....LIKENS NSWAASHINGTON,D.C.20036
G,SPRUCE
,WILLISO.WiLSN.,M RAVFMAN THONAKATHLE N RADIO TtttttOHC AND Tt LECOPICA
B RULE D.WI OCSTL L.►CTCRSON RATHLCCN M.HAWTIN
,RCDCRICR S.RICHARDS MICHAEL O.FREEMAN JOHN C.CHILOS 2D2.0111-6164
G.ROBERT JOHNSON THOMAS C.O'AOUILA THERESE AMSRUSRO
GARY R.MACOMBER LARRY D.E.SPEL DOUGLAS R SEATON
ROBERT S BURR JANIL S.MAYCWON GARY O.BLACKtORO
HUG.V.PLUNKETT.]II OAVID A.JONES SCOTT C.RICHTER
•
September 15, 1983
•
Mr. Rick Murray
B-T Land Company
1055 East Wayzata Blvd.
Wayzata, MN 55391
Re: Timber Creek Wood
Dear Mr. Murray:
1. Facts
You have asked us to advise you concerning the validity of
the possible requirement by the City of Eden Prairie that your
company construct at its expense a road over existing platted
right of way in a plat which is adjacent to property you are
subdividing from the present point of termination in the existing
plat to the border of your proposed plat. At that point, it would
then join a road to be built by you in your plat which road
construction within your plat is also required by the City.
2. Conclusion
For the reasons stated hereinafter, it is my opinion that
the City does not have the statutory power or inherent police
power to require you to build this road as proposed outside of
your plat.
,V.:3
•
•
September 15, 1983
Page 2
3. The City has only those subdivision powers which are
expressly granted to it or are obviously and necessarily
implied in the statute. There is no authority in this case.
The City's power to require dedications and public
improvements as part of the subdivision of property is derived
. solely from Minnesota Statutes 5462.358. There is no authority in
the statute to require off-site improvements or dedication off
site. The concept of 'dedication off site is the same as
off-site improvement in that both impose costs or require
activities related to property the developer does not own.
In fact, Subd. 2b of Minn. Stat. 5462.358 specifically
restricts dedication to 'a reasonable portion of any proposed
subdivision.' The entire scheme and intent of the statute is
directed to on-site activities.
The City should have required the developer of the adjacent
plat to have built the road to the edge of that plat or the City
should have escrowed funds then to pay for that future upgrading
within that plat.
The only Minnesota case on subdivision exactions supports
your position.
In Collis v. City of Bloomington, 246 N.W.2d 19 (1976), the
Minnesota Supreme Court required that exactions at time of a
subdivision be in proportion to the needs created by the
subdivision itself and within the subdivision. The Court stated:
'A municipality could use dedication regulations to
exact land or fees from a subdivider far out of
proportion to the needs created by his subdivision
in order to avoid imposing the burden of paying for
additional services on all citizens via taxation.
To tolerate this situation would be to allow an
otherwise acceptable exercise of police power to
become grand theft.'
Moreover, I do not believe the City's ordinance even states
that the City may require that an off-site improvement be
constructed. On that basis alone, it is illegal. See Briar West,
Inc. v. City of Lincoln, 291 N.W.2d 730 (1980) at 732, 733.
020;.3
•
•
•
•
September 15, 1983
Page 3
4. Case law in other jurisdictions supports your position.
The leading case on this subject is Hylton Enterprises v. •
Board of Supervisors, 258 S.E.2d 577 (1979) in which the Virginia
State Supreme Court held that a local governing body may not
require a developer to improve existing public highways abutting
• his subdivision as a prerequisite to approving the plat.
This case was cited with approval by the Nebraska Supreme
Court in the case of Brian West, Inc. v. City of Lincoln, 291
N.W.2d 731 (1980) in which the court struck down a similar
requirement.
In a recent case of Arrowhead Dev. Co. v. Livingston County
Road Comm., 327 N.W.2d 702 (1982), the Supreme Court rejected a
• similar county requirement and found, moreover, that since there
'was no specific authority in the statute to require the developer
to pay for off-site road improvements, none should be implied.
That is the case in the Minnesota Statutes, also.(
There are numerous other cases in support of the above.
5. Conclusion
In conclusion, the City may not require you to upgrade a
road located in the adjacent plat.
Very truly yours,
_ , )I• ( /
Bruce D. Malkerson
BDM/jf
3087j
•
•
B-T LAND COMPANY
1055 EAST WAYZATA BOULEVARD
WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391
1512)473-8511
September 13, 1983 •
Mr. Gene Dietz
City Engineer •
City of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55343
Re: Timber Creek Wood, Eden Prairie •
Dear Mr. Dietz:
I appreciate your prompt and frank expression of why we should be
responsible for paying for the off-site street connection of Ashby Lane to
Whittington Walk in the Chatham Wood Subdivision as a condition for the
platting approval of our Timber Creek Wood plat. We do not agree with
your analysis that the burden for paying for this off-site road connection
should be borne by our property. There are obviously many other properties
involved, which not only will have direct street access from the extension,
and consequently direct lateral benefit, which will have a general benefit
from the installation of this road extension. Any benefit to our property
would only be general in nature.
The comparison of this off-site road improvement to the realignment of
Duck Lake Trail is in no way the same. Your comment that we are not
contributing to the realignment of Duck Lake Trail is absolutely correct
and absolutely appropriate. The City has produced no evidence that any
increase in traffic at the Duck Lake Trail, County Road 4 intersection
would be because of our plat and mandate this upgrading of Duck Lake
Trail. The Duck Lake Trail off-site improvement has general benefit to
the entire community and I assume is being paid for from the community's
general fund or State Aid Road Funds.
The street connection of Ashby Lane to Whittington Walk has general
benefit to the entire community and very specific benefit to the residents
of Chatham Wood. None of this benefit is in any fashion addressed in
your proposal.
1 have attached a copy of the letter I requested from our attorney's
office addressing this issue of off-site improvements and how it has been
treated by the courts in the past. We feel that this requirement for our
property to bear the problem of building a road in another developer's
project as well as all of the roads within our own site is both arbitrary
and unreasonable. The only evidence that the City has set for requiring
this road is that it "makes good planning sense". I do not argue that the
road, as a function of planning, should be connected. I do not feel that
it is appropriate for the City to request that the developer's of this property
pay to complete road connections in another developer's project simply
because the City forgot to have that developer install them and/or did not
deem that it was "good planning" to install them at that time.
I am somewhat at a loss for words to argue your position that you
"understand our feeling and recognize the fact that there are other benefited
properties", but still maintain the attitude that you "feel" that we should
solely bear the burden of the cost of this road improvement. As you
know, cities must prove benefit to any property which they plan to charge
for any municipal improvement, I feel that the City would be hard-pressed
to prove that we are creating the need for this connection and are the sole
beneficiaries of this road connection. To date, there has been no evidence
to support either case.
After reviewing the proposed Developer's Agreement, we agree with
all aspects of that Agreement except Paragraph 6.D., the requirement that
we connect the roads in the Chatham Wood Subdivision at our sole expense.
• We feel it would be much more equitable and reasonable to address the
issue as part of Paragraph 6.C., as follows:
6.C. Plans showing phasing proposed for the prop-
erty, indicating the termination of Phase I at the
second northerly cul-de-sac until such time as the
connection to Whittington Walk is completed. Should
Owners require Phase II and the Whittington Walk
connection prior to the time the City is ready to
make said connection, the City agrees to allow Owners
to make said connection and repay Owners at Owners'
unit cost for the linear footage of street improvements.
•
From your remarks last week, I assume that the staff's position on
this matter is closed, consequently, we will look forward to discussing this
issue with you before the City Council.
Sincerely,
B-T LAND COMPANY
Rick D. Murray
Vice President
RDM/sg
enclosure
cc: Mayor, Wolfgang Penzel
Paul Redpath
Dr. George Tangen
George Bentley
Richard Anderson
Carl Juice, City Manager
Roger Pauley, City Attorney
Bruce Malkerson
1
1
.9053 '
•
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
THROUGH: Carl Jullie, City Manager
FROM: Eugene A. Dietz, Director of Public Works
DATE: September 14, 1983
RE: Timber Creek
Ashby Lane Connection
At a previous Council meeting, I was instructed to investigate the costs
associated with connecting Ashby Lane between the Chatham Woods development
and the proposed Timber Creek Woods development. Additionally, the developer
and the staff were to attempt to negotiate the connection, if possible.
After reviewing the subject, I find that the length of the road necessary to
construct the interconnection would be 8B.6 feet. Based on a very rough
cost estimate, it would appear that the cost of this road work would be
approximately $5,000. This estimate was determined.without the use of soil
borings and there could be problems that I am unaware of at this time.
However, based on the very short length of the roadway, the additional
expenses could not be significantly more.
By way of comparison, we have determined that the cost to realign Duck Lake
Trail to provide a 90° intersection with County Road 4 would be in the range
of 520-30,000. We have a fairly firm alignment determined for the project,
but have not completed final plans.
In discussing this information with Rick Murray, I find that we are at an impasse
regarding the interconnection of Ashby Lane. He feels that his firm has no
responsibility for either project. As I indicated at the Council meeting
previously, I disagree with that philosophy and believe that it is not unreasonable
to request that the interconnection be made by B T Land and that the City of Eden
Prairie perform any construction work necessary on Duck Lake Trail.
The result of the discussions to date have been that the Developer's Agreement
includes a clause requiring B T Land to make the interconnection on Ashby Lane.
The developer disagrees with this and will present his arguments at the Council
meeting for your consideration. Staff will be there to answer additional questions.
EAD:sg
Z63 E
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 41-83
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE
ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99
WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance
(hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made
a part hereof.
Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be
removed from the Rural District and be placed in the Planned Unit Development 9-83
District (hereinafter "PUD 9-83"), which includes R1-13.5 and R1-9.5 Zoning
Districts.
Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of
that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of , 1983, entered
into between B-T Land Company and the City of Eden Prairie (hereinafter "Developer's
Agreement"). The Developer's Agreement contains the terms and conditions of PUD 9-
83, and are hereby made a part hereof.
Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings:
A. PUD 9-83 is not in conflict with the goals of the Guide Plan of the
City.
B. PUD 9-83 is designed in such a manner to form a desirable and
unified environment within its own boundaries.
C. The exceptions to the standard requirements of Chapters 11 and 12 of
the City Code, which are contained in PUD 9-83, are justified by the
design of the development described therein.
D. PUD 9-83 is of sufficient size, composition, and arrangement that
its construction, marketing, and operation is feasible as a complete
unit without dependence upon any subsequent unit.
Section 5. ' The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and
hereby is, removed from the Rural District and shall be included hereafter in the
Planned Unit Development 9-83 District, and the legal descriptions of land in each
district referred to in City Code Section 11.03, subdivision 1, subparagraph B,
shall be and are amended accordingly.
Section 6. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and
Definitions Applicable to the Entire City .Code Including Penalty for Violation" and
Section 11.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their
entirety by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
2O5eF
•
Section 7. This Drdinance shall become effective from and after its
passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie on the day of , and finally read and
adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City
on the day of
ATTEST:
.John D. Frane, City Clerk Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of .
20C 3
•
• � aaaaaanaaa.sa� Oi;»="' - Rig:
Eta:::::::::::: >e 3 R4a43i34Su•��•"•�'�>o"
4nn yy. O '•
N0P v.....4O�Svr...� °'Ci . Mr4 ua•seeeeene 0�3yyQ=�IO eMe gam:
f. •; »O_"or• 4 ........
rr r..N 1;- wt i.\.4 ..
•
$Sc 5<<<<i<<c>r'.c! E.m.o> •47.�.a 4•UN'O.NYPM1ii:11;i'" "-»:
p _ >" ..- po «" ct+ pnpn6-..mom:" :. .:E ,'�:�« >
M0Y.93:::=4:::1OOiM M ' :`y00MmaO60P , r•' .OH7r
}••Q{nEe2 n n n •4>•:r••- ;:: .'.:'fir
• • eO�.o3o3 ng•°a i8i w6s..n- :-Op.1 r • r.r.- ^
L"::^S ,:•mTnT..To - _ ".'�::• noon^ r
3 �:e3»o»�.•."9ERFFll�R••.mi., _ �• 'ac".'o3'
Yo�'.X�°Ntiatin�Mr .:_n-.= 33"»3;3',i .E=.'g'. _";Lz {0,
YgEtrt s wa °-)E 3tiz8i.°• •m..omr...>niegi'I •••.' ••vi:+g .
p g ER!1: a; R_a:�e a.e•eN=re - i ..Q r"=
EL•yy+.SyiL. m•'e!r G -uau.°am' 'Rega:; _-� Tfi
i '°-3 �oN"IiI; SiiEEaE 1:1""o'ftEIR 3tiuwtz.7.riea ills 3 2, 3• "
• iir 0>ia .....
•• a Re QQ � Fi>a''''' »»R 0Pn3aE- - >NNM >8r.::iapg .> y»•R»s��m ..."m > t$ n .
8.
"44 2 32 14w : i .4»a,
• ..
••
134n. " m •^":w - • e ` ':>
,neg3 »"g »hipE ' nii- _ •`
YfiE:am^ eE ree Ovu'y »..- - tOv !
,
e.oY_o ! R':E nr2SE ir 'e m ;,Raa • 'y . °e"e«EP° i
-.
hir
m•.=Y:,.B«si eQo".•nzo'°-?oeE°tiN'•m> .•"B »:�1111112
a" '8m$R"'..»8�: . r..ERBga S^r7e_i
1+ 1 fir_ >§ar'e'°r3•mvo�N_ .15( =M•'E_
F.NN 1Op:$u °ii"•i"3y»r or« , .r•>r'
211 ' 4R-,r eEmr=o g e3E
} r� g 33� c' Aeu+.. �o'°EE- "E to:4. y
ii•Eti '_.i! r ° :tom ; oir v
-)!)a g•u, a �; C
y."� a " O.gs ......
` Y'^•r ....i MZO:. l"m3o 3: =Z ..tE4t
i
•
,205814
Timber Creek Woods
•
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of , 1983, by
and between B-T Land Company, a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter referred to as
"Owner," and the City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred
to as "City:"
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Owner has applied to City for development of approximately 162
acres for rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 and R1-9.5 and preliminary plat for 156
lots and two outlots, situated in Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, more fully
described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, and said entire 162
acres hereinafter referred to as "the property," and;
WHEREAS, Owner desires to develop the property as 156 single family detached
( lots, on said 162 acres, based on plans dated August 2, 1983;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Ordinance #41-83 and
Resolution #83-204, Owner covenants and agrees to construction upon, development,
and maintenance of said property as follows:
1. Owner shall plat and develop the property in conformance with the
materials dated August 2, 1983, reviewed and approved by the City
Council on August 16, 1983, and attached hereto as Exhibit B,
subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. Owner
shall not develop, construct upon, or maintain the property in any
other respect or manner than provided herein.
2. Owner covenants and agrees to the performance and observance by
Owner at such times and in such manner as provided therein of all of
the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in
Exhibit C, attached hereto and made a part hereof.
3. It is the Owner's intent to dedicate the flood plain area and the
wooded hill of Outlot B. concurrent with the development of the
property north of the creek, as depicted on Exhibit B, provided that
the overall density of Outlot B be at least consistent with the
20531
. density depicted on the Concept Plan, a copy of which is attached
hereto as Exhibit D. It is understood that Owner is requesting a
separate agreement that, if accepted by the City Council and
executed by both parties, would specifically set forth the transfer
referenced herein and the consideration given for this transfer.
4. Prior to grading permit issuance, Owner shall submit erosion control
plans and information for review and receive the approval of the
City Engineer of said plans.
5. Prior to building permit issuance, Owner shall submit to the •
Director of Planning, and receive the Director's approval of the
following:
A. A development plan for Blocks 1, 2, 5, and 6, as proposed,
and as depicted on Exhibit B, indicating the types of homes
to be built upon each lot. Said plan shall provide for
differing housing types adjacent, directly across, and
diagonally across from each other. Said plan shall also
provide for not more than three similar housing styles,
i.e., garage front, garage side, located in a row along the
same street.
B. Additional housing types that fit on R1-9.5 lots, in
conjunction with the development plan addressed in 5.A.
above.
6. Prior to building permit issuance, Owner shall submit to the City
Engineer, and receive the City Engineer's approval of the following:
A. Plans showing extension of the road north of Outtot A to the
west property line. Owner shalt, concurrent with
construction of said road, construct a five-foot wide
concrete sidewalk, to be placed on the south side of this
road extension to the west property line.
B. Plans showing construction of an eight-foot wide bituminous
path between Lot 24, Block 5, and Lot 1, Block 7, from the
sidewalk to the phasing line. The slope of the trail shall
be revised to a safe grade as determined by the City for
biking purposes.
•
C. Plans showing phasing proposed for the property, indicating
the termination of Phase I at the second northerly cul-de-
sac until the looped road to Chatham Woods is completed for
purposes.
D. Plans showing the extension of Ashby Lane into the Chatham
Woods Subdivision to the west, to Whittington Walk. Owner
shall be responsible for the cost of construction of the
entire portion of Ashby Lane to Whittington Walk.
20551
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have caused these
,resents to be executed as of the day and year aforesaid.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
•
Carl J. Jullie, City Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 1983 by Wolfgang H. Penzel, the Mayor and Carl J. Jullie,
the City Manager of the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on
behalf of said corporation.
Notary Public
B-T LAND COMPANY
Rick D. Murray, Vice President
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 1983, by Rick Murray, Vice President, B-T Land Company, a
Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the corporation.
•
Notary Public
aa3'S
•
•
•
Timber Creek Woods
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 83-222
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SUMMARY
OF ORDINANCE 41-83 AND ORDERING THE
PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY .
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 41-83 was adopted and ordered published at a regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the day of
• , 1983;
•
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN
PRAIRIE:
A. That the text of the summary of Ordinance No. 41-83, which is
attached hereto, is approved, and the City Council finds that said
text clearly informs the public of the intent and effect of said
ordinance.
' B. That said text shall be published once in the Eden Prairie News in a
body type no smaller than brevier or eight-point type, as defined in
Minn. Stat. sec. 331.07.
C. That a printed copy of the Ordinance shall be made available for
inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office
of the City Clerk and a copy of the entire text of the Ordinance
. shall be posted in the City Hall.
D. That Ordinance No. 41-83 shall be recorded in the ordinance book,
along with proof of publication required by paragraph B herein,
within 20 days after said publication.
ADOPTED by the City Council on , 1983.
Wolfgang H. Fenzel. Mayor .
ATTEST:
•
John 0. Frane, City Clerk
aoK3
•
Timber Creek Woods
The following is the full text of the City of Eden Prairie Ordinance No. 41-83,
which was adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Eden Prairie on , 1983. Following the text of the
Ordinance, the Developer's Agreement, which is incorporated therein by Section 5 of
the Ordinance, is summarized.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
OROINANCE NO. 41-83
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LANO FROM ONE
ZONING DISTRICT ANO PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LANO
IN EACH DISTRICT, AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY COOE CHAPTER 1 ANO SECTION 11.99
WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EOEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, OROAINS:
Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance
(hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made
a part hereof.
•
Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be
removed from the Rural Oistrict and be placed in the Planned Unit Development 9-83
Oistrict (hereinafter "PUD 9-83"), which includes R1-13.5 and R1-9.5 Zoning
Districts.
Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of
that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of , 1983, entered
into between B-T Land Company and the City of Eden Prairie (hereinafter "Developer's
Agreement"). The Developer's Agreement contains the terms and conditions of PUD 9-
83, and are hereby made a part hereof.
Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings:
A. PUD 9-83 is not in conflict with the goals of the Guide Plan of the
City.
B. PUO 9-83 is designed in such a manner to form a desirable and
unified environment within its own boundaries.
C. The exceptions to the standard requirements of Chapters 11 and 12 of
the City Code, which are contained in PUD 9-83, are justified by the
design of the development described therein.
D. PUD 9-83 is of sufficient size, composition, and arrangement that
its construction, marketing, and operation is feasible as a complete
unit without dependence upon any subsequent unit.
Section 5. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and
hereby is, removed from the Rural District and shall be included hereafter in the
Planned Unit Development 9-83 District, and the legal descriptions of land in each
district referred to in City Code Section 11.03, subdivision 1, subparagraph B.
•
2053('
shall be and are amended accordingly.
Section 6. City Code Chapter I entitled "General Provisions and
Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and
Section 11.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their
entirety by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. •
Section 7. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its
passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie on the day of , and finally read and
adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City
. on the day of .
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of .
•
ac)63
Summary of Developer's Agreement: Timber Creek Woods
Developer will develop the land as described in Exhibit A which is attached
to and incorporated in the Developer's Agreement. In addition, the Developer's
Agreement provides for:
1. Submission of plans regarding sewer, water, and drainage to Engineering
Department.
2. Submission to the City Engineer of a development Plan for the land.
•
3. Submission to Watershed District of storm sewer construction plans.
Developer to follow the rules and regulations of said Watershed District.
4. Developer's warranty of title to the land.
5. Construction and maintenance of public improvements which are to be conveyed
to the City as well as preservation and restoration of areas surrounding
said improvements. Submission of a bond or letter of credit to ensure the
quality of said construction, maintenance, preservation, and restoration.
6. Rough grading to be performed by the Developer for improvements which the
City will construct pursuant to 100% petition of all owners of the land.
• Submission of a bond or letter of credit for the rough grading.
7. Payment of first three (3) years' street lighting, engineering review, and
{ street signs costs.
8. Developer's commitment not to oppose rezoning if Developer fails to proceed
in accordance with the Developer's Agreement within 24 months.
9. Application of the Developer's Agreement to transferees of the land.
10. City's remedies in the event that Developer violates the provisions of the
Developer's Agreement.
11. Notice to the City's cable franchise.
12. It is Owner's intent to dedicate the flood plain area of Outlot B and the
wooded hill concurrent with development of the property north of the creek,
as depicted on Exhibit 8.
•
13. Owner shall submit an erosion control plan to the City Engineer, and receive
the City Engineer's approval of said plan.
14. Owner shall submit a development plan for Blocks 1, 2, 5, and 6, as
proposed.
15. Prior to building permit issuance, Owner shall submit to the City Engineer,
and receive the City Engineer's approval of the following:
a. Plans showing extension of the road north of Outlot A to the
westerly property line. Concurrent with construction of said road,
Owner shall construct a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk along the
• south side of said road extension.
b. Plans showing construction of an eight-foot wide bituminous path
between Lot 24, Block 5 and Lot 1, Block 7, from the sidewalk to the
phasing line. The slope of the trail shall be revised to a safe
grade as determined by the City for biking purposes.
c. Plans showing phasing proposed for the property, indicating the
termination of Phase I at the second northerly cul-de-sac until the
looped road to Chatham Woods is completed for safety purposes.
d. Plans showing the extension of Ashby Lane into the Chatham Woods
subdivision to the west, to Whittington Walk. Owner shall be
responsible for the cost of construction of the entire portion of
Ashby Lane to Whittington Walk.
NOTICE. A printed copy of this ordinance is available for inspection by any person
during regular office hours at the office of the City Clerk.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on
1983.
John D. Frane, City Clerk Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
•
IG
•
•
MEMORANDUM
( 10: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Manager Carl J. Jullie (j
SUBJECT: Cable Television Rate Increase 0 finance Amendment
DATE: September 16, 1983
The Southwest Suburban Cable Commission, the joint powers organization that oversees
the administration of our cable television franchise, has reviewed the proposed rate
increases made by Minnesota Cablesystems-Southwest, our cable operator. Eden Prairie's
representatives on the Commission are Paul Redpath and myself.
On August 17, 1983, the Commission held a formal public hearing with respect to the
proposed rates. Testimony was received from Minnesota Cablesystems-Southwest
(Minnesota) and Commission staff. The hearing process employed during this hearing
and the Minutes are part of your packet. Because you, the City Council, must
appropriately act to approve or deny the proposed rates, you should consult
Attachment C. Standards for Review of the hearing process. These standards were
carefully considered by the Commission in making its recommendations to you. You
too must consider these standards during your hearings.
The result of the Commission's hearing was a decision that the Commission recommend to
the city councils that the proposed rates be approved and appropriate changes be made
( o the cable franchise ordinance. A resolution to this effect accompanied by supporting •
finds of fact are attached. Ordinance change language, approved by the city attorneys,
Commission legal counsel and the Commission itself, is included with this portion of
your packet.
The exhibits referenced in the findings of fact are included for your review. These
exhibits were introduced as sworn testimony at the Commission's August 17, 1983 hearing.
Please note that Minnesota Exhibit 2 is part of Commission Exhibit 1. Minnesota Exhibit
3 is the actual rate proposal made by Minnesota and is not included here. You received
a copy of this proposal in July or August. Please bring it with you on Tuesday evening.
A summary of the proposed and recommended rates shown in context with unregulated
rates follows the exhibits to the findings of fact.
CJJ:jp
HERBST & TRUE, LTD.
MEMORANDUM•
TO: Operating Committee
Southwest Suburban Cable Commission
FROM: Adrian E. Herbst, Attorney
DATE: August 4, 1983
RE: Hearing Process - Rate Change
The following is a suggested process for the Commission to
follow and to recommend to its member cities in review of the
requested rate changes:
1. The in-depth hearing should be conducted by the
Commission. This will greatly reduce the cost and time that
would be incurred if each member city conducted an in-depth
hearing.
2. By in-depth, I suggest a thorough hearing with testimony
and,exhibits introduced under oath by the company and Commission
witnesses. The witnesses would be subject to examination by
each party to the proceeding, and questions from the Commission
members. This process will make it possible for the Commission
to have a complete record to support its recommendation to the
member cities. A hearing with less formality would not likely
produce a record sufficient for all cities to act upon, without
further in-depth hearings, the recommendation of the Commission.
3. Record.
a. A record should be made. By this, I recommend
that (1) a court reporter be retained or, (2) a skilled
recording secretary be used to prepare detailed minutes,
and a tape recording of the hearing. The court reporter
would be more expensive.
b. Witnesses should be sworn.
c. Exhibits marked and retained.
4. Presentations of evidence, testimony and exhibits
should be made first by the company, followed by cross-examination
by the Commission attorney. Presentations of evidence, testimony
and exhibits of the Commission (its experts) should be made by
the Commission attorney, followed by cross-examination. At the
conclusion of the presentations, the company and the Commission
attorney should be allowed a reasonable time to summarize.
Thereafter, the Commission should close the formal part of the
hearing. Thereafter, the Chairman should permit the public
generally to comment. A roster should be maintained of all
who speak. At the conclusion of public comments, a motion
should be made to close the hearing and the Commission should
then deliverate on its decision. After reaching a decision,
the Commission attorney should be instructed to prepare Findings
and recommendations and if necessary, based on the recommendations,
a recommended ordinance.
It is recommended that the company and Commission attorney
notify the Commission Chairman and each other five business days
before the hearing of the witnesses, exhibits and description of
the anticipated testimony and description of exhibits that will
be introduced at the hearing. This will help to eliminate con-
fusion and problems at the hearing and help each party to prepare
adequately for the hearing.
5. The Commission Chairman should preside at the hearing.
The Commission attorney's associate should assist the Chairman
and provide objective advice to him and members of the Commission
on any decisions that have to be made about the hearing process
including what testimony or exhibits may be properly heard and
considered. It should be noted that the Rules of Evidence that
guide the conduct of court proceedings are not applicable to this
process. However, the Commission Chairman may disallow testimony
and exhibits that are improper, such as hearsay. The decisions
of the Chairman must be exercised with care in order to insure
fairness in these proceedings even though it is not a courtroom
proceeding.
The Chairman should administer an oath to each witness and
make sure all exhibits are properly retained.
6. Exhibits. The exhibits required of the company should
be in compliance at a minimum with those specified in the franchise.
A copy of the appropriate portion of the franchise ordinance is
attached to this memorandum as Attachment A.
7. Notices. Notices of the hearing should comply at a
minimum with the franchise ordinance. See Attachment B.
8. The location of the hearing should be at a convenient
centrally located place.
9. Time. The time should be specified in the notice.
The hearing may be adjourned if on the date specified, (a) the
hearing cannot be completed, (b) more time is needed, or, (c)
if either party desires further time to provide additional
information.
-2-
•
10. The Findings and recommendations of the Commission
and, if necessary, the recommended ordinance, should be approved
and distributed to the member cities for action by each city. •
At a minimum, the Findings should reflect the consideration
by the Commission of the matters set out in the franchise
' ordinance applicable to rate changes. See Attachment C.
11. If any issues arise during the proceeding that require
interpretation or opinion, the Commission's associate attorney
shall advise the Chairman. However, the Commission attorney
and company may be permitted to write or express opinions on
. those matters.
12. Report to the member cities should include:
a. Minutes of the hearing.
b. Exhibits introduced.
c. Findings and recommendations of the Commission.
d. Recommended ordinance, if necessary.
e. City expense record.
13. Each member city should conduct a hearing on the
ordinance in the manner it desires and in conformance with the
notice requirements of its ordinance and applicable law. See
Attachment B.
14. The city is required to act on the application within
thirty-one days after it closes its hearing. See Attachment D.
15. Commission will be responsible for coordinating accep-
tance by company of each adopted ordinance. Also, Commission
will collect and distribute its reimbursable costs, as well as
each member city's, at time of acceptance. See Attachment E.
16. The company should be furnished with a copy of this
process memorandum, as should each city. If there is no objec-
tion within five days after delivery to them, the Commission
Administrator and attorney should arrange for the notices and
schedule the hearing.
AEH:ndr
Attachments
-3-
ATTACHMENTS
A. Application Requirements
B. Notice Requirements
• C. Standards for Review
D. Time for Action on Application
.E. Reimbursable Costs
NOTE: Each Exhibit is taken from sections of the
Franchise Ordinance.
4
•
{
ATTACHMENT A
H
(4) 111e pzuceuu1es 6.0 De 1Vl.VMCV au wiauyaliy a aat.a
or charge shall include at least the following:
(a) An application for a rate change will be
submitted to City and a copy filed with
the Board.
(b) The application shall be supported by
statistical and other proof indicating
that the existing rate or charge is
• inadequate and unreasonable and that the
proposed increases are required to
enable Grantee to render service to ful-
fill its obligations under this Fran-
chise and 'to derive a reasonable profit
therefrom.
(c) The application shall include current
information and financial information
with at least the following: •
1. Balance sheet; •
•2. Income statement;
3. Statement of sources and ap-
(
plications of funds;
{- 4. Detailed supporting schedules
of expenses, income, assets
and other items as may be re-
quired by City; •
• S. Statement of current and pro-
• jected subscribers;
6. A current list of rates and
•
charges of Grantee applicable
to systems owned or operated
by its parent corporation or
other subsidiaries or affili-
ates of its parent corporation
at other locations;
7. A current list of rates and
charges for other systems in
the seven county Metropolitan
area;
8. Cash flow derived from System
services since the commence-
. ment of this Franchise; and {
9. Statement of tax benefits re-
ceived by Grantee, its part- •
•
ners or shareholders, as a !
result of their investment in
System: •
•
46
•
ATTACHMENT B
is
•
•
•
}
1
•
(d) City will notify Grantee and Board and
schedule a public hearing on the request
within two weeks from the date of
receipt of the application and the deter-
•
• mination by City of its completeness. • .
• Grantee will notify the public through
providing notice for one week, each day
between 7:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. on two
channels of the date, place and time of
the hearing. City will publish notice
ten days prior to hearing in its
official newspaper.
ATTACHMENT C
4
I
•
D. Rate Changes.
(1) No rate change shall be approved that would result
in different rates or charges for service to simi-•
larly situated subscribers in the rate territory,
in the sole opinion of City.
(2) No rate or charge change will be approved unless•
• all of the standards for review have been consi-
dered and evaluated and determinations have been •
made, all pursuant to this Franchise. •
(3) The standards for reviewing a proposed rate change
will include at least the following: • •
'43
. .
(a) The ability of the Grantee to render •
System services and to derive a reason-
! able profit therefrom under the existing
rate schedule and proposed rate ached-
' ule; •
.
(b) The revenues and profits derived from
System services; .
(c) Tax benefits received by Grantee, its
partners or shareholders, as the result
•
of their investment in the System;
(d) Cash flow derived from System services;
(e) The efficiency of Grantee;
• (f) The quality of the service offered by
• Grantee; .
(g) The original cost of the System, less
depreciation;
• (h) A fair rate of return with respect to
investments having similar risks to that
of providing cable communication servi-
ces;
(i) The extent to which Grantee has adhered
to the terms of this Franchise;
(j) Fairness to residents and subscribers;
(k) Capital expenditures by Grantee in pro-
• viding updated technology and service to
subscribers;
i
•
(1) The extent to which Grantee has then pro-
vided service to schools, hospitals,
libraries, publicly owned or leased
buildings and similar institutions
within City; . .
• (m) Such other factors as City may deem rel-
evant.
ATTACHMENT D
•
•
•
•
•
,.
i .
Gs
t-;
(e) After closing the public hearing, City
will have 31 days within which to make •
its determination. Any approved change .
( in rates or charges shall become
effective upon the date determined by
• City.
(f) If City, fails to approve the requested
change or rates or charges within the 31
day period, Grantee may appeal pursuant
to the then applicable procedures of the
Board.
•
(g) City may utilize a rate consultant to
advise it on proposed rate changes and
• to assist it 'in maintaining uniform
•
•
47
•
•
ATTACHMENT E •
•
•
•
i
•
•
i
i
•
(h) All costs for the review of an applica-
• tion for a rate or charge change shall
be paid by Grantee upon demand of City.
• The costs shall include, but not be lim •
-
ited to, attorneys' fees, and the reas-
onable value of services (as determined
•
by City) rendered by City or any city
employees, agents or representatives of
City.
•
•
•
•
•
•
ABSTRACT OF 17 AUGUST 1983 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSION
•
i fl.
•
•
is J
,
•
PUBLIC HEARING - 17 AUGUST 1983 7:00 p.m.
Mr. Courtney declared the public hearing open at 7:01 p.m. Prior to starting
the hearing the Commission Chairman asked the Commission Attorney to review
for the public in attendance the hearing process. This was done. Also, the
SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSION
MINUTES
17 AUGUST 1983
PAGE 4
Commission Attorney asked the Attorney for the company to stipulate on the record
to the following:
A. The company accepts the process;
B. The company waives the two week time period within which a City
is required to schedule a public hearing on the request; and
C. The company agrees to be bound by the record and proceedings
before the Commission.
Mr. Popham, Attorney for the company, agreed to this stipulation, and added only
that his company would provide informal presentations at the hearings before each
city.
MINNESOTA CABLESYSTEMS-SOUTHWEST TESTIMONY
The Commission received oral testimony from Gary Mizga, Executive Vice President
and Regional Manager for Minnesota. Mr. Mizga introduced the following Exhibits:
A. Schedule of Oelivery of Rate Adjustment Document to Southwest
Officials and
B. Cablesystems-Southwest's response to the SWSCC's chart entitled
"Areas of Non-Compliance with Ordinance and Offering" and
C. Minnesota Cablesystems-Southwest's Rate Adjustment Proposal of
June 24, 1983, with errata letter dated July 18, 1983.
According to Minnesota Cablesystems-Southwest, the proposed adjustment is neces-
sary because of unexpected cost increases including high interest rates, costs
associated with the build for the additional miles of plant to accomodate new
subdivisions which were built up between the writing of the proposal and actual
build, as well as mileage not included in the original estimates, doubling of
converter costs, and lower than expected revenue because of market penetration
difficulties associated with gaining access to multi-unit buildings and the gen-
SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSION
MINUTES
17 AUGUST 1983
PAGE 5
eral economic climate.
The proposed rate adjustment, according to the proposal, would provide the follow-
ing financial benefits:
A. 1984 losses would decline by almost $260,000;
B. 1983 losses would follow suit by $530,000; and
C. An economic foundation would be provided allowing the company to
raise additional financing.
Mr. Mizga testified that Minnesota was aware of problems with a private easement
on Oakdale Avenue in Edina, that Minnesota has been in continuous contact with
residents in that area and that certain developments in St. Louis Park would now
make it possible to service the Oakdale Avenue area without securing the private
easement.
COMMISSION STAFF TESTIMONY
Mr. Ralph Campbell, III, Franchise Administrator, presented oral testimony re-
garding his reports to the Comnission. The following Exhibits were introduced
by Mr. Campbell:
A. Rate Increase Ordinance Criteria Report;
B. Financial Analysis Rate Increase Proposal;
C. Cooper Associates, Inc. Technical Evaluation dated June 8, 1983.
The Administrator addressed the proposed rate adjustment in light of its fairness
to residents and subscribers and the extent to which Minnesota has provided ser-
vice to Schools, Hospitals, Libraries, Publicly Owned or Leased Buildings and
similar institutions within the Cities. The Administrator concluded that
Minnesota had been substantially fair. Complaints have been relatively few
compared to the high number of residents and subscribers. The Administrator's
report also illustrated additional steps being taken by Minnesota to deal more
SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSION
MINUTES
17 AUGUST 1983
PAGE 6
effectively and fairly with subscribers.
With respect to the issue of service to public buildings and similar institutions,
the Administrator reports that Minnesota stands in substantial compliance with
this criterion.
The Administrator's report also documented the quality of service offered by
Minnesota and the extent to which Minnesota has adhered to the terms of the Fran-
chise. The Administrator's report was supplemented by a performance evaluation
prepared by Cooper and Associates. The areas of non-compliance were accompanied
by a response from Minnesota.
COMMISSION FINANCIAL CONSULTANT TESTIMONY
The Commission retained the consulting firm of CTIC Associates, Inc. (CTIC) to
prepare a financial analysis of the proposal. CTIC submitted its analysis, en-
titled ANALYSIS OF THE PENDING RATE INCREASE PROPOSAL OF MINNESOTA CABLESYSTEMS-
SOUTHWEST dated August 9, 1983.
The Commission also received oral testimony from Deborah Love-Heilig of CTIC
regarding the Financial Analysis prepared by CTIC. Introduced as an Exhibit at
this time was the ANALYSIS OF THE PENDING RATE INCREASE PROPOSAL OF MINNESOTA
CABLESYSTEMS-SOUTHWEST.
The Analysis illustrates that original company forecasts showed cumulative
capital expenditure at the end of fiscal 1985 a total of $27.5 Million will be
invested. The original forecast for the same period was $20.1 Million. These
higher costs, according to the Analysis, can be attributed to:
A. More plant miles than were originally forecasted;
B. Higher per mile construction costs;
C. High converter costs; and
D. Design changes.
SOUTHWEST SUBUR8AN CABLE COMMISSION
MINUTES
17 AUGUST 1983
PAGE 7
According to the Analysis, Minnesota has provided ample support for the concept
that the added cost was necessary and beneficial to the system and its subscribers.
• CTIC reports that the system offers profitability at this time only to the limited
partners who can fully benefit from the tax savings of the losses and investment
tax credits. The proposed rate increase, according to CTIC, will not immediately
have any effect on system profitability. According to the Analysis, the principal
benefit of the rate increase will be to hasten positive cash flow in order to en-
sure that debt service or repayment can begin on schedule in 1986.
CTIC concludes that it finds the proposed rate adjustment is justifiable and
merited.
The Commission asked Deborah Love-Heilig to review each of the standards for re-
viewing a rate change request in the franchise ordinance. Ms. Love-Heilig then
reviewed each of those standards.
Following this testimony and questions and comments from Commission members,
Mr. 8unce moved to open the hearing to the public; Mr. Rosland seconded. Approved.
•
(SWSCC 8.17.83-8)
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
There being none, Mr. Bunce moved to close the public hearing; Mr. Rosland
seconded. Approved. (SWSCC 8.17.83-9)
COMMISSION ACTION
Mr. Redpath moved to direct staff and legal counsel to prepare findings of fact
supporting a Commission recommendation to approve the rates proposed by Minnesota.
Mr. Jullie seconded. Approved. (SWSCC 8.17.83-10)
SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSION `--
MINUTES
17 AUGUST 1983
PAGE 8
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Redpath moved to adjourn at 9:32 p.m.; Mr. Bunce seconded. Approved.
(SWSCC 8.17.83-11).
NOTICE !
THE RESOLUTION OF THE COMMISSION WITH VOTES AND CHAIRMAN
COURTNEY'S SIGNATURE WILL BE MAILED TO YOU BY GARY MATZ
ON TUESDAY 6 SEPTEMBER 1983. IF YOUR PACKETS NEED TO
BE ASSEMBLED BEFORE YOU RECEIVE THIS SIGNED RESOLUTION.
USE THE UNSIGNED COPY ENCLOSED HERE.
•
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN
CABLE COMMISSION ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDING CERTAIN RATE CHANGES BE
APPROVED BY ITS MEMBER CITIES
WHEREAS, the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission (SWSCC) is a
joint powers entity organized pursuant to a Joint Powers
Agreement entered into between the Cities of Eden Prairie, Edina,
Hopkins, Minnetonka and Richfield; and
WHEREAS, the SWSCC has undertaken a process of reviewing cer-
tain rate changes to the Franchises granted by its Member Cities
to Cablesystems Southwest; and '
WHEREAS, the process of the SWSCC has included a comprehen-
•
sive study of the proposed rate changes, an in-depth hearing and
public hearing and deliberation and review of Findings; and
WHEREAS, the SWSCC desires to recommend approval of the
requested rate changes and to transmit to its Member Cities for
review and approval, its Findings, and a proposed Ordinance, and
{ the record and exhibits of its proceedings.
NOW, THEREFORE, at a meeting of the SWSCC on August 24, 1983,
on motion by and seconded by
the following was resolved:
1. That the attached Findings and proposed Ordinance were
approved.
2. That the Administrator of the SWSCC is hereby directed
to transmit to the Administrator of each City, the Findings and
proposed Ordinance and a record of the proceedings of the SWSCC.
DATED:
SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSION
By
C. Wayne Courtney
Its: Chairman
RESOLUTION OF FINDINGS
OF FACTS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
OF THE SOUTHWEST
SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSION
(HEREINAFTER "COMMISSION")
WHEREAS, the Commission was formed by the City Councils of
Eden Prairie, Edina, Hopkins, Minnetonka and Richfield, Minnesota
(hereinafter "Parties") in May, 1982, to coordinate the admi-
nistration and enforcement of the respective cable communications
franchises of the Parties; to report and recommend to the Parties
relative to the operation of their respective cable communications
franchisees; and to perform such other duties as are required; and
WHEREAS, based upon the authority granted to it pursuant to
Article VII, Section 3, subdivision Q, the Commission is to
advise and recommend to the Parties as to all requested rate or
charge changes; obtain from the cable communications franchisees
and from any other source, such information relating to rates,
costs and service levels as any Party is entitled to obtain; and
conduct hearings as the Commission deems appropriate;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, at a meeting of the
Commission, that the Commission does hereby make the following:
I. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
1. The Parties have received a request for a rate adjustment
as set forth with supporting documentation and justification in a
document entitled Minnesota Cablesystems-Southwest Rate
Adjustment Proposal (hereinafter "Proposal") dated June 24, 1983.
2. The Commission Attorney met on Friday, July 29, 1983,
with the Parties' attorneys to discuss the process for reviewing
-1-
the Proposal and preparing, if necessary, a franchise ordinance
amendment.
3. In a memorandum to the Commission's Operating Committee
and Commission dated August 4, 1983, the Commission Attorney
recommended a process for the Commission to follow in preparing a
recommendation on the Proposal. The process was approved by the
Operating Committee and recommended to the Commission.
4. The Commission at a regular meeting on Wednesday, August
17, 1983, reviewed the proposed process and received an explana-
tion of the process from the Commission Attorney.
5. The Commission received a memorandum from its Attorney
dated August 17, 1983, regarding the issue of whether Minnesota
has completed construction of the Initial Service Area. The
( Attorney cited Article VI, Section 4C(2) of the ordinance which
states that a rate change may not be approved until two years
after commencement of construction or upon completion of all
construction required by Article V, Section 1, whichever is later
in the opinion of the City.
6. The Attorney, in the above described memorandum,
reported that an area exists on Oakdale Avenue in Edina that is
not yet completed. The Attorney further reported that
Minnesota's response to this area of non-compliance is that a
private easement is necessary to serve that area and that dif-
ficulties have arisen regarding those negotiations.
7. On August 17, 1983, at 7:00 p.m. the Commission held a
public hearing, after publishing notice and by further providing
-2-
notice over the cable system channels as provided for in the
franchises, at the City of Edina regarding the Proposal.
8. Prior to starting the hearing the Commission Chairman
asked the Commission Attorney to review for the public in
attendance the hearing process. This was done. Also, the
Commission Attorney asked the Attorney for the company to stipu-
late on the record to the following:
A. The company accepts the process;
8. The company waives the two week time period within
which a City, pursuant to the franchise Section 4 Subdivision
D(4)(d), is required to schedule a public hearing on the request;
C. The company agrees to be bound by the record and
proceedings before the Commission.
Mr. Popham, Attorney for the company, agreed to this stipula-
tion, and added only that his company would provide informal pre-
sentations at the hearings before each city.
9. The Commission received oral testimony from Gary Mizga,
Executive Vice President and Regional Manager for Minnesota. Mr.
Mizga introduced the following Exhibits:
A. Schedule of Delivery of Rate Adjustment Document to
Southwest Officials (attached hereto as Minnesota Exhibit 1);
and
B. Cablesystems-Southwest': response to the SWSCC's
chart entitled "Areas of Non-Compliance with Ordinance and
Offering" (attached hereto as Minnesota Exhibit 2); and
-3-
C. Minnesota Cablesystems-Southwest': Rate Adjustment
proposal of June 24, 1983, with errata letter dated July 18,
1983 (attached hereto as Minnesota Exhibit 3).
10. According to Minnesota Cablesystems-Southwest
(hereinafter "Minnesota") the proposed adjustment is necessary
because of unexpected cost increases including high interest
rates, costs associated with the build for the additional miles
of plant to accomodate new subdivisions which were built up be-
tween the writing of the proposal and actual build, as well as
mileage not included in the original estimates, doubling of con-
verter costs, and lower than expected revenue because of market
penetration difficulties associated with gaining access to multi-
( unit buildings and the general economic climate.
11. According to Minnesota, at current subscriber rate
levels, losses will reach $9 Million by the end of 1985. For the
fiscal period just ended, almost $500,000 was lost from opera-
tions. An extra $4 Million of equity has been injected in order
to relieve the pressures of higher plant, equipment and interest
costs.
12. The proposed rate adjustment, according to the proposal,
would provide the following financial benefits:
A. 1984 losses would decline by almost $260,000;
B. 1983 losses would follow suit by $530,000; and
C. An economic foundation would be provided allowing
the company to raise additional financing.
-4-
13. Mr. Mizga testified that Minnesota was aware of problems with
a private easement on Oakdale Avenue in Edina, that Minnesota
has been in continuous contact with residents in that area and
that certain developments in St. Louis Park would now make it
possible to service the Oakdale Avenue area without securing the
private easement.
14. The Commission Attorney and the Commission itself were pro-
vided an opportunity to question Mr. Mizga.
15. Mr. Ralph Campbell III, Franchise Administrator
(hereinafter "Administrator"), presented oral testimony regarding
his reports to the Commission. The following Exhibits were
introduced by Mr. Campbell:
A. Rate Increase Ordinance Criteria Report (attached
hereto as Commission Exhibit 1);
B. Financial Analysis Rate Increase Proposal (attached
hereto as Commission Exhibit 2);
C. Cooper Associate, Inc. Technical Evaluation dated
June 8, 1983, (attached hereto as Commission Exhibit 3).
16. The Administrator addressed the proposed rate adjustment
in light of its fairness to residents and subscribers and the
extent to which Minnesota has provided service to Schools,
Hospitals, Libraries, Publicly Owned or Leased Buildings and
similar institutions within the Cities.
17. With respect to the issue of fairness to residents and
subscribers, the Administrator concludes Minnesota has been fair.
-5-
Complaints have been relatively few compared to the high number
of residents and subscribers. The Administrator's report also
illustrated additional steps being taken by Minnesota to deal
more effectively and fairly with subscribers.
18. With respect to the issue of service to public buildings
and similar institutions, the Administrator reports that
Minnesota stands in substantial compliance with this criterion.
19. The Administrator's report also documented the quality
of service offered by Minnesota and the extent to which Minnesota
has adhered to the terms of the Franchise. The Administrator's
report was supplemented by a performance evaluation prepared by
Cooper and Associates. The areas of non-compliance were accom-
panied by a response from Minnesota.
20. Minnesota, the Commission Attorney and the Commission
itself were provided an opportunity to question Mr. Campbell.
21. The Commission retained the consulting firm of the Cable
Television Information Center (hereinafter "CTIC") to prepare a
financial analysis of the proposal. CTIC submitted its analysis,
entitled ANALYSIS OF THE PENDING RATE INCREASE PROPOSAL OF
MINNESOTA CABLESYSTEMS-SOUTHWEST (hereinafter "Analysis"), dated
August 9, 1983.
22. The Commission also received oral testimony from Deborah
Love-Heilig of CTIC regarding the Financial Analysis prepared by
CTIC. Introduced as an Exhibit at this time was the Analysis OF
THE PENDING RATE INCREASE PROPOSAL OF MINNESOTA
CABLESYSTEMS-SOUTHWEST (attached hereto as Commission Exhibit 4).
-6-
23. The Analysis illustrates that original company fore-
casts showed cumulative capital expenditure at the end of fiscal
1985 a total of $27.6 Million will be invested. The original
forecast for the same period was $20.1 Million.
24. These higher costs, according to the Analysis, can be
attributed to:
A. More plant miles than were originally forecasted;
B. Higher per mile construction costs;
C. High converter costs; and
D. Design changes.
According to the Analysis, Minnesota has provided ample sup-
port for the concept that the added cost was necessary and bene-
ficial to the system and its subscribers.
25. CTIC states that Minnesota's original proposal assumed 690
miles of plant of which 624 miles would be aerial plant and 66
miles would be underground construction. Minnesota reports that
by the end of fiscal 1983, Minnesota will have constructed 595
miles of aerial plant and 150 miles of underground plant for a
total of 745 miles. To date, the average per mile cost of new
plant construction for Minnesota has been close to $17,830, close
to 39 percent higher.
26. CTIC also states that in its original proposal, Minnesota had
planned to use Scientific Atlanta Descrambler-Converters with an
estimated cost of $70 per unit. Because the Scientific Atlanta
Converter was not available at the time of construction,
-7-
Minnesota decided to use the Zenith Z-TAC addressable converter
which costs approximately $150 per unit. According to CTIC, the
Z-TAC allows for many operator benefits in terms of their
security and reducing signal theft but has meant an additional
$3.1 Million in capital spending.
27. CTIC reports further that the decision to use Z-TAC conver-
ters also required upgrading of headend equipment. Additional
higher headend cost can be attributed to the addition of one
earth station above the original plan of two earth stations.
This provides for a greater diversity of satellite signals.
28. CTIC reports that the system offers profitability at
this time only to the limited partners who can fully benefit from
the tax savings of the losses and investment tax credits. The
proposed rate increase, according to CTIC, will not immediately
have any effect on system profitability. According to the Analy-
sis, the principal benefit of the rate increase will be to hasten
positive cash flow in order to ensure that debt service or
repayment can begin on schedule in 1986.
29. CTIC concludes that it finds the proposed rate adjustment
is justifiable and merited.
30. Minnesota, the Commission Attorney and the Commission
itself were provided an opportunity to question Ms. Love-Heilig.
The Commission asked Deborah Love-Heilig to review each of the
standards for reviewing a rate change request in the franchise
ordinance. Ms. Love-Heilig then 'reviewed each of those standards.
-8-
•
•
31. An opportunity was provided for members of the public to
comment on the proposed rate adjustment. No public comments were
received.
32. Based on the foregoing, it is the Commission's finding
that the proposed rate adjustment is justifiable and merited;
that the standards for reviewing a proposed rate change have been
considered and properly addressed; that the failure of Minnesota
to wire certain areas of Oakdale Avenue in Edina are being ade-
quately and timely resolved; and the members of the public have
been afforded reasonable notice and an opportunity to be heard on
the proposed rate adjustment.
{
II. RECOMMENDATIONS
A. The Council should accept this report from the
Commission.
B. The Council should adopt the ordinance set forth
allowing Minnesota to implement its rate adjustment.
-9-
RESOLUTION NO. 83-231
A Resolution, Relating To The Adoption of Ordinance No. 46-83 ,
amending Ordinance No. 80-33, Granting a Franchise to Minnesota
Cablesystems-Southwest to Operate and Maintain a Cable Communication
System in the City, Establishing Rates and Charges.
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie adopted Ordinance No. 80-33,
granting a franchise to Minnesota Cablesystems-Southwest to operate
and maintain a Cable Communication System in the City, and it has
been proposed to amend Ordinance No. 80-33 to change the rates
• and charges for various services rendered by the Grantee thereunder
("rate proposal"); and,
WHEREAS, the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission ("Commission")
of which the City is a member, on August 17, 1983 pursuant to
authority granted to it, conducted a hearing on the proposal; and,
WHEREAS, the Commission, on August 24, 1983, adopted certain
Findings of Facts and Recommendations, with respect to the rate
proposal; and,
WHEREAS, the Commission has transmitted to the City Council
an abstract of the public hearing, which it held on the matter, on
August 17, 1983, together with all Exhibits received and made a
part of the record in those proceedings; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing on the
adoption of Ordinance No. 46-81 on September 20, 1983, and the
record of the proceedings before the Commission was introduced
and made a part of the record of such public hearing;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
1. Notice of the public hearing on the matter of amending
Ordinance No. 80-33 by the adoption of Ordinance No. 46-83
was duly given.
2. The Findings of Facts and Recommendations of the
Commission are hereby accepted.
3. Adoption of the proposed rates and charges contained
in proposed Ordinance No. 46-83 would not result in
different rates or charges for a service to similarly
situated subscribers in the rate territory, in the
opinion of this Council.
4. In considering the adoption of Ordinance No. 46-83 ,
amending Ordinance No. 80-33, all of the standards for
review for rate and charge changes have been considered
and evaluated and determinations have been made all
pursuant to Ordinance No. 80-33.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on .
llolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
SEAL
ATTEST:
•
John D. Frane, City Clerk
•
j.'T
ORDINANCE NO. 46-83
AN ORDINANCE OF CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
AMENDING THE CABLE COMMUNICATIONS FRANCHISE
ORDINANCE NO. go.33 , EXHIBIT B, PARAGRAPH I,
SUBPARAGRAPHS Al, A3, B, C, D, E AND HI AND H4
TO CHANGE THE RATES AND CHARGES FOR
INSTALLATION, MONTHLY RATES, CONVERTER,
RECONNECTION, EXTRA OUTLETS, COMMERCIAL RATES,
FM SERVICES AND PREMIUM SERVICES AND PROVIDING
FOR THE EFFECTIVE TIME OF THIS ORDINANCE.
The City Council of the City of Eden Prairie ordains:
SECTION 1. Ordinance No. , Exhibit B is amended to read:
Subdivision 1. Paragraph I.A.1. is amended to read:
}
I. SUBSCRIBER NETWORK
A. Basic Rates.
1. TIERS
Standard
150 Ft. Aerial Seniors &
Installation Monthly Homebound
(First Outlet)
TIER 1 Universal Service. $ 19. Free Free
Converter not re- 24.95
quired for this
service.
TIER 2 Family Service.
Subscriber owns $19.95 $ 3.95 $ 3.36
converter 24.95
Subscriber rents $ 19.95 Various Various
converter from 24.95
Grantee.
TIER 3 Full Service.
Subscriber owns $ 19.95 6-.45 5.66
converter 24.95 6.50 5.52
Subscriber rents
converter from $ 19.95. *Various *Various
Grantee 24.95
-1-
TIER 3 Expanded Service.
(Expanded)(Included converter
and unit) $ 19.95 $ 10.95 $ 9-.-31-
24.95 13.95 13.25
Subdivision 2. Paragraph I.A.3. is amended to read as
follows:
3. Subscribers will have the option of renting various
types of converters as follows:
Grantee Converter Rate Schedule
Initial Monthly
Description Rate
1. Block Converter $ 44
41. OAK L-35 1.50
{
1. Ccientific Atlanta 6704
-act up converter 2 r56
3,44
remote control option 4,rO6
addre33ablc feature 3.89
(not initial-ly _c)
32. ZENITH Z-TAC
A. Set-top converter 4.00
B. Set-Top Converter with remote
control including remote 5.50
volume.
C. Enhanced Set-Top converter with
enhanced remote control in- 6.00
eluding remote volume muting,
favorite channel.
The rental rate shall be added to the appropriate base rate
shown in the table above if the subscriber rents the converter
from Grantee. Subscribers may choose to rent or buy converters
from sources other than the Grantee, however, a Grantee converter
or descrambler will be necessary for premium services.
-2-
Subdivision 3. Paragraph I.B. is amended to read as follows:
B. Extra Outlets.
*Installation (At
time of initial
Installation) Monthly
TIER 1 Converter not required $i8-.46 each Free
15.00
TIER 2 Subscriber owns converter $10.00 each $1.95 each
15.00
Subscriber rents
converter $19+9G each **Various
15.00
TIER 3 Subscriber owns converter $ .9A each $3.r95 each
15.00 4.95
Subscriber rents converter
from Grantee $10 **Various
15.00
* Each outlet installed after the initial installation will be
$19.95. $19.95 each.
** Same Converter rental option as provided for under Section IA
of this Exhibit B.
Subdivision 4. Paragraph I.C. is amended to read as follows:
C. Reconnection.
Charges for reconnection of existing installations shall be
04,95 $19.95 for each reconnection regardless of the number of
outlets.
Subdivision 5. Paragraph I.D. is amended to read as follows:
D. Commercial Rates For Subscriber Network Services.
These rates will be subject to negotiation and will depend on
the number of outlets required and the type of services selected.
A typical commercial rate for department store requesting 10
outlets on TIER 3 with no converters and no premium pay would be:
-3-
Installation (at cost on time and material basis)
Monthly Rate 1st outlet $15-.00 $20.00
2nd outlet 00-.04 15.00
3rd outlet $ 5=04 10.00
Additional
outlets $ 4,04 9.00
Subdivision 6. Paragraph I.E. is amended to read as follows:
E. FM Rates.
FM service in included in the rate otructurc3 for rates shall
be $10.00 for installation and $2.50 per month. FM service shall
be available only on TIER 2 and TIER 3 and not available on TIER 1. •
Subdivision 7. Paragraph I.H.1. is amended to read as
follows:
H. Premium Services.
1. Premium service rates shall be as follows:
MONTHLY
Home Theatei-iicttiorkc $ 3.95 $8.95
Home Box Office 4-.38 8.95
CINEMAX 4,60 9
The Movie Channel 4,56 8.9K
Showtime 4-.89 1737.7n
Premiere 4-.30 8.95
HTN plus 8.9�
Bravo 5
The Disney Channel 9.93
Spectrum Sports 9.95
Subdivision 8. Paragraph I.H.4. is amended tb read as
follows:
4. Installation for premium services shall be free with the
intital installation of TIER 2 or 3 service. Thereafter, any
number of premium services added at the same time shall be added
-4-
at a maximum cost of $14.95 19.95.
SECTION 2. Process for Adoption and Acceptance.
Subdivision 1. Adoption by Other Member Cities and
Cancellation. That notwithstanding any other provision of this
Ordinance, if all of the Cities of Eden Prairie, Edina, Hopkins,
Minnetonka and Richfield do not adopt a similar franchise
Ordinance amendment then those that have may cancel the Franchise
Ordinance amendment adopted by it. This right of cancellation
must be exercised within thirty (30) days after all Cities have
acted on a similar amendment.
Subdivision 2. Time for Adoption and Acceptance. Grantee
shall have thirty (30) days from the last date of adoption of a
similar franchise Ordinance amendment by all of the Cities listed
in Section 9 of this Ordinance, to accept this franchise
Ordinance amendment in form and substance acceptable to City.
However, in no event will acceptance occur later than ninety (90)
days after the adoption of this franchise Ordinance amendment
unless the time for acceptance is extended by City. Such accep-
tance by Grantee shall be deemed the grant of this franchise
Ordinance amendment for all purposes.
Subdivision 3. Requirements with Acceptance. With its
acceptance, Grantee also shall deliver to City an opinion from
its legal counsel, acceptable to City, stating that this
franchise Ordinance amendment has been duly accepted by Grantee,
that the said Ordinance, as amended by this Franchise Ordinance
•
-5-
amendment is enforceable against Grantee, and the corporations
which signed the Agreement of joint and several liability dated
January 9, 1981 related to the franchise granted by the said
Ordinance, in accordance with its terms, and which opinion shall
otherwise be in form and substance acceptable to City.
Subdivision 4. Effectiveness of Ordinance. That this
Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon adoption and
publication and acceptance in writing by Grantee.
Passed and adopted this day of
1983.
CITY OF MINNESOTA
By
Mayor
And
Manager
-6-
Minnesota 1
Schedule of Delivery
of
Minnesota Cablesystens-Soutlwest's Rate Adjustment Proposal
Operating Catmittee and Cable Administrator 06/29/83
Cannissi:on Members 06/30/83 - 07/13/83
Mayors of the five cities 06/30/83 - 07/22/83
Council Members:
Eden Prairie 07/26/83 - 07/29/83
Edina 07/26/83 - 08/01/83
Hopkins ' 07/27/83 - 08/18/83
Minnetonka 07/19/83 - 08/15/83
Richfield 07/28/83 - 08/16/83
• Commission 1
MEMORANDUM
SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSION
TO: MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION
FROM: RALPH B. CAMPBELL, III, ADMINISTRATOR
SUBJECT: RATE INCREASE ORDINANCE CRITERIA REPORT
THURSDAY 11 AUGUST 1983
The Commission and City Councils,during this rate increase process,
must consider the attached standards for review of the proposed rate in-
crease.
Items (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (g), (h) and (k) are discussed in the
financial ANALYSIS OF THE PENDING RATE INCREASE PROPOSAL OF MINNESOTA CABLE-
SYSTEMS-SOUTHWEST which is included in your packets.
Items (f) and (i) are covered in the AREAS OF NON-COMPLIANCE WITH ORDIN-
ANCE & OFFERING report, along with Cabiesystem's responses. Staff's opinion
is that Cablesystems responses to items cited in this report have adequately
addressed these concerns. Staff will follow up to insure compliance dates
are enforced.
Items (j) and (1) are discussed below:
(j) Fairness to Residents and Subscribers:
Minnesota Cablesystems-Southwest has been fair to residents and to
subscribers. While there have been complaints, both to the company and
the Commission, these have been relatively few compared to the high
number of subscribers (26,000) and residents (155,000). The Commission
receives an average of two complaints a day, most of which are referred
to the company, which apparently takes care of them due to the low number
of recalls from complainants.
Most complaints received and acted upon by the Commission have to do
with:
1) Confusion over billing practices
2 Confusion over marketing programs and offers
3) Questions about availability of cable service (When will I get cable?)
4) Program content
To deal with these complaints and provide for fairness to subscribers and
residents, Cablesystems:
1) Has designed a new billing process involving an entirely new billing
computer, that will, according to the company, greatly reduce this
confusion and provide for smoother billing cycling. This new system
will be in place late this year.
2) Undertaken extensive marketing research involving focus groups and
other surveying techniques to determine more effective ways to explain
and sell cable services. In addition, Cablesystems will soon hire a
professional marketing manager to head its marketing department.
3) Has aggressively completed building over 99 percent of the initial
service area and continues to aggressively develop the remaining
portions as recently defined by the new line extnesion policy. The
company's management staff responsible for this construction has
personally met with individuals and neighborhood groups to facili-
tate communication and proper construction of the system.
4) Provides explanations to individuals with respect to the company's
rights to provide its programming and offers to install lockout
devices (at no charge) to those who object to certain programs.
This is done personally by senior programming and administrative •
managers.
• Cablesystems' present and proposed rates are, for the most part, signifi-
cantly lower than those of other operating Twin Cities area cable systems.
Some local systems that have not been built do have .lower initial rates than
those proposed by Cablesystems. But these rates can be expected to increase
by higher percentages than ours due to the relatively long time periods that
have elapsed since these systems were designed and financial projections ap-
plied.
Cablesystems has clearly provided the highest level of local programming
support in this area. Subscribers to the Southwest system enjoy more quantity
and diversity of local programming than any others in this metropolitan area.
(1) The Extent to Which Grantee has Provided Service to Schools, Hospitals,
Libraries, Publicly Owned or Leased Buildings and Similar Institutions
within the Cities:
Cablesystems stands in substantial compliance with this criterion.
All City Halls, schools, Public Safety Centers and libraries have been I=
or will soon be connected to the -residential network. Some fire stations, �-
public works departments, community centers, libraries, other publicly owned
buildings and facilities and the hospital will be included in the negotiations
for connections to the proposed institutional network which will be intercon-
nected with the residential network.
•
A F C t-1AN3GE STAk)O2oS oc' 2EV E(j
D. Rate Changes.
(1) No rate change shall be approved that would result in different
rates or charges for service to similarly situated subscribers in
the rate territory, in the sole opinion of City.
(
(2) No rate or charge change will be approved unless all of the stan-
dards for review have been considered and evaluated and determin-
ations have been made, all pursuant to this Franchise.
(3) The standards for reviewing a proposed rate change will include
at least the following:
(a) The ability of the Grantee to render System services
( and to derive a reasonable profit therefrom under the
existing rate schedule and proposed rate schedule;
. (b) The revenues and profits derived from System services;
(c) Tax benefits received by Grantee, its partners or share-
holders, as the result of their investment in the Sys-
tem;
( (d) Cash flow derived from System services;
(e) The efficiency of Grantee;
(f) The quality of the service offered by Grantee;
(g) The original cost of the System, less depreciation;
(b) A fair rate of return with respect to investments
( having similar risks to that of providing cable commu-
nication services;
(i) The extent to which Grantee has adhered to the terms of
this Franchise;
(j) Fairness to residents and subscribers;
(k) Capital expenditures by Grantee in providing updated
technology and service to subscribers;
(1) The extent to which Grantee has then provided service
to schools, hospitals, libraries, publicly owned or
leased buildings and similar institutions within City;
21
I
. r r 01 A L
A 0. m
M
~ •'1
o O a
x ,� E m:
.. o
o j
a'aa>! samvanrvo.py aa.v m3i1
m n m S n man m n A 2 A C m
en a. .a.8,24 aA•ca
7 a C a a n M<n 7 0 ..m w M �.qq A
goon .....g m M a.n n n r `6 n < 3 O
g..c p�' rag n ® a^w c �• . M n m m.m
I6` 10 a C W w 0'4 a m ~ m ; " x
Y' p C
•
wn n7O.mnr An Tn Okra
mO r.
7' n C a n m n n O rw CO
nT O m m n .•n 70 Q T m • 0 T T m a•
(� Qg Mpg mom . mma Am „ n2 - -
Dm M 0 A g a z Y
A 7 m a a m . a a s <77 a ri a a s Z A
!� pg 2 77
re rOi�a 7 fl 0 a O.
• T M m '411n n
mile 0'• 1000000 m 7 a ' N i C L
am A S e n 0 T O n m 1� • m O y n
S ~m 4 n o'M n n o n c., O• ••
A C a A m T a a..• 7 O.O m P a C C A
AS. fie 7w m a6ramaO. n o. pm
r nn 7'O. O.Oa n • .• `c• 0
• 4 0 a m m�99 M T m O m 7
nnwA mmn mm'wn0a•71' AO O6 ■
•M .1 < 1+.-< a n n m �7 7 �'I e O
sa O n C. M
A n C O O O fni n n ram+O a gat• A m
y•C P7 w e 0..m a 7�• m a
A a 7� IC
J n C 2.m O m a M'O a Y
r a. 17 aT a a n a n 'i
g A
, .- ramm5 m' tel
•4 V q
w
mean ne "o$Mnti1 .aoa.m2MOO as 0
( gypp{1-.a r1+w n n r o. a T-c a.711
re raja B aan .-n 3 ° .Our.-a aA a ant +7
• p 6 n a ma a m n • n M
n a O. o 0 Y a r m 0 a a n O • a T..n CI
7 n m a a n T 0. a a a a 7 B a :a
a J n a M n 7 m •1 a•1 . aa G. n jW• . .
a a d 0 0.0.o M Y O ifs.O. M
m•i as N90 ri o a.w m A>...«.7�a nSS OO
n •ai l
m T r 0•t a n .+a s nn C a a Y n C x
a. p..mc man fioom'noc ncm A
Ayy yxt r a 8 a 04 7 7 n •Oi mm 7a T ;32a p
F m S Ia. n.-6 fA m a a a n n 0.n .al a n o P. _
• q a O a ..i C names- m a•M 1n
.j 8 (c� O mµ P p O O'C O O a m n ro 0 •1 n a N
�j n rt >yy S .a.ra+7 a m 0 a a n w ®Bn c a a'p a
00m m Cm re mmna7a i0 O no vi
1 • n . m m < a 7 c O a. 0.A 7 n 77
1n� .+nj.nai Oa7T m m a,
C a a o m m 7 n m m 'n n O 0 T a 4
�. n r C 7 1T n a a m o. j n ..a ..
A 9 m m 16 ,- ' a M.+n n m n n O -.
•
m a O 0..0 s 7 O'n a.O M a C x IF•'��
M n n C m 17 a o rt a m M n a y
• a n A O n m mama a •1 c o c a 10 c m a m t.
ccn 0 .7i T ... C M nAW M n ova. z
6 9 a a 0 9 n.{m aC a m n O W 7 .n1 ..n a
e.#Q K a•O m a 7 9a . n O C n w m c o n : CD
00 yN pCr a�T ay„.a `i•aG a 0 rim a r a ( G�
ee F 1 C 6 I/ na on . 9
O a n • Cr NI
I..
._— •
n
gig
M
n
rn
. •
n
y OA• • N i a N a In S
.A-• N
....• wN PM O•+S•
p.. .. M • P' 0. N n InN
•'," O O 7�
Y. T R5
cc
IN t
N
Z N(�
4 .._ n �5 •o to
w 0 w 1
n w • i n r n o
w
A
g 8 O. ea An 0
IV On ]9 n 9
p a ; Yw Z• N
1 00 P O C • n 4 91
•
• re •. P Z
✓ i g gi
i my•M,« �„
n w n p�' rp.p _ >
n A n O m a Z Z
'" I
annle r. no
in
• M M (p(yqq,w • . _
f1 S
y• nWetm
p o ; 1 0 0
>n
• a q Cr p•p 0 0 O C
• M a N 0
O A n Z a m .n'/ Z
a • g 0 0 0 c
n F n n
n • 6 _ M7
Z
• • • n
D. n 0 1.1
s 0
___. a 1
/'t. pC Ma0S 0 0400OS manMa] MEm•rtf Cf 1
a ga8n O w nn ] Y w M000 m ] w re ] p.n (0 O
n • 00 le n 0 'O ^ nn M] 0 + 0 to
nn OnRy nmwOnM 001.4
nM nan nnCn ft q
6w w OM n m mn n a n•<n n • 6n O C S O ma O P 0 2AA Cl
•n
no O M n C 0 C P n n 9 a ] ] n m 0 C n
• n 1.00C ...Iry nnn F M n M A• m n 7•'P M P] ] n R
n S.+O • O ] M O ] m O S O S 0 m C <m m M
m w II00 •.1 n ] M m w Co 0 `< O M n n m7 P 0 00• C 0 •T0 E`<• S p.m n`< n Y••o Y••0S 0•
eve ] amp Mw 0 •••
n On 7 -mama O•m 0 w Om •n Mnn 0 E _
1•+ m S n M ] m n1 m a w a C m C S 0 ] O O m a Z
'< C M•w O 0.B a 00 0 O B a n O n• S C n n m m m a 0 • n
6 nn Cl P• 1.n. n wec (�•• nm mf0Om .+nCm n
O w nM a nn• O > n000S0. mmna.+nnn O fl ,
n a w 0 00 n 0 m P f1 M n T n w 0•0.a w< n B
7< n00 y n T.+.+n m m. Wn m m M<On< .0 m1
M 00.0 O ]•O M.+n M M n• w 0 • w ] n M O M f•
] ..•fo n t w .+n g < O C S n M m n n A in
00 421t. M a 0 n 0 O O w M M O n 0 n S n w i
• MO 0 M 9 M n C 10100 a •0 a m 0 M S a
O a••'m .+ ] M n Co. n•.+n s m 0 a C 0• mom a W
] 00.4 m M m O C M O
00.0020
O a 0 D n w M.+n 0
M
✓ m0 n O• w n M02 ..SJ n B oM • ] nB ]muw eS
n tw n.•• ] • n OCOan 0 M m n n <
n 2B w .+mg S0 0' 0Bw nn mnn
o M nn9 B n 0
m w n M9 9
n 0.n n.• n r< n m M P CO Co ..• n nKmm0 n • n0 mm •
Z
IA g n w .+m n 0 0. 0O ] 6] q M
m fMOE9 a _ +y
M -] Y Cm .-
MCwO^w On .+ mM] AMnn •0 7
In
] m 77na0 90 B O m P O ] 00 J en
.
0 w wmma0 co .• Yn ] wwMBm< mwZ
Ra n ] 0 • a a.• f •i•
n P wOm . PnM C011,+nn PM] nnO M
fiw Fer; nb y 0 OaRMOa r+ n
4 V M n L
m2m _
x 0.0 ] ua▪ n a m a aYnF n •-•a m -m w
nnn n n g n0M0.0,m . MMfww •
M 0.' n M m 9.o. m ] ] B C O n O n g C. O
n a w m < n n C m C n O M B r 00 n
O a n m S n M w M C w < M w 9 a] a
n n nw aT PT n•w < mmnw
m MM. Mn a n n 0•< n • ] n
a ea P m o•< .r�.m o o n 24 a ..
] MO n Mma • a Or
4 O.] ] a
R
R 1 r
O o
n : 1
n y
cc pi.
w n w
i
m a` -
•
N! NO A to_
m n G
.. 0. r en
� imp-1imp-1H N! 1
• 3.
H M C
— 0 O ec
Pa
N t
Z N
___.___ �gQf r1 2 _. _. O 1
n n n ... ... �C m C < n F
O.0 0 W C I•.• I•• II 1.0 i
I. • I•Y 0 n Y n n n f1
M M V, ;; "'� W S W O W S M
22 • ma Y 7 a 0 IF••0 0 m W S N
M O W 0 cr< eM W ONO,g 0 0 0 .0 N
• Pt a 00`C< °�+ n ..».e II o 0. e,• z
•At I B.
n A n n n O S n i n :S
B no .�.n � 00 �•v to
m z a
7 r• C ^ 7 Y 7 m CO• Y 1� P �. n
(Wn n n 7 1 nng Y n n 0 O n II % NI
R M M< Y iC .'I.I.n n W m Cil
a a 7 W n 0 n 0'M C C 0
n n n n W W W 9 n 9 O' col C
W M nn o. n n n n to coo
n 0 W 0 7 0 • I..W 0 n w r
Y 0 an .100 I.0 0 7 '1
' M •
•0 •g •nt W n••.0 rn W I• 10 f) x
O • m 0 n S n 0 W C 0 n NI
n n' n`C W W W O n 0 Cr 7•
' C' H 0-.0 en n Co• n re a
Sr m n n 9 0
M •9 • 0 7 Ore< 7 N Q H • A
O M A®o 0 n M 1.•In 0 W M 0 O
nrlitt
B IB•. eat, n <0o W IBC m n 0 .
con cot WK 1~C 0 MSn O Wrn 0. O
11 m � n• R 7 a r�o .9 O 7 m !
W 2 O H• m 0 0 0 0 0 2
o n B000 na0n 0 n
con O m o n o •B en
- 1
-- p .{ ---- a
N 9 n 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 C n 7 C C III 1°••7 0 °<'n n n S n a S 0. i
o C B n mb nne4n nnn 0
rwr Onvnwm oor.O. re l9 3 n
I.n•'1•Y W C 0 S n . 1•� •W51.222128 S OS W •1
n W n • ..n 9 C W • Y 0. M Co O. n 0 1 K
1+n Y`< 8 I.9 0 0'0• 0 B B w n 7 7 Y n m C •q
R 7 B O'W •0 O 9 n 1••I-'O 7 0 •0 C CO 1. ID W
• 0. .1 H C n I+n n M M W W M Y C m n S 70 n 00 O 0 9 W to
• M S O. 0 m 7 7 • • n n 0 0'7 S o W Y C 7 m 0
0.n H r.ID N .0 V.70 Z.00 n •C •K 0 0 7 .• V'
< A
toW W S 7 n W n n • Cl Cr) n n 0..Y W • 0
or•W N ID n 0 S O n nC S n 9• M W 1� ...W 1+ CO 0 .
ro —M 03 0 0 S CO VO I.0 Y ,•N ... 0.
M O rI. C 0 •O< B 7 9 W n 9 • O F 7 I••W C n Y Z
0 7 0 7 7 co Y I. ton O I.• W O O. 5 .0.0.4 S C 0.
0 0.9 •-O.41 V.7 • n n W '4 n W 7 n W W 0. n
m•9 N.. 00 W F• 7 S 0
1- M W C 0. n O n n F• W •W C 7 n n T 0 n O Y R Cl
re 7 9 Cr I. 0'o n ID CO I• 1 n n < Cr M I.S C IDn •
90 K n W r!I..CD 7 n K 9 O O •W 0 7 < W I•n .{ M O OS o
• W W r co W ro n M no Y n n o.W W I. re se•1 n Y 3 • 1110. n n`C W n n'C n •0 9 W enC Crto
•S 7 S T S..n n n C o S co n I. C n'70 M n W 0 .Ni
0 0 O o n W • O I.I•C W • 0 ••3 M n O I-n I.N
0 0 n W n 9 n n W • r+ W W O n < F C n 7 Oj
7•.0 W S Y n N W S W n n M n n S W W W O K 00 n H
0 M. C .•7 S n 0 9 < 0 0 M O O W W 7 n.. rn 0
r7 ID ne>n n W SC 0 I. n 4 nn. n X COn.< CoW
• W en re coW • 0 n 7 co n WO .n 09 nO0 00.0 V
0 W S N O.>•V W n 0 CO0 o N n n O.
n O.n I. n n 9 toS 7 C. 7 O O.Y , W n O
W•S n to n o ! m OM
n S • 09 7n YO m• 6 m < Xm7CW6M7m0n6.Snn10 9 • 0.0 M nn W O.co p
n 3.3 leroi0g re O 7 n O Y M 0 0 A I•'Y+ O cO n N n Y S n N n Co 1+ .O CO
W 7 6 0 ny n o . 0 W Y•0 100 0 S B 9 a W v.C W C m W r z
0 I.m W II 0 3 7 W 9 W 9 n W n n 7 Cr Y W W N
n n O n 00 m 7 9 n Y M 0• •W m m n •
o•n m x
C n m W.•O. r 0 ' • Co O. W I• W n W 0 C ..
..O'0 n • 0 Y o n n W 03 n e n C 0 7 S 0
SW n S• 0 5 n • C N I. W r 00 n n < C W I. CM .,�
n W C Y O 0 M 0 W n no S 0 7 I-n 0•.-W W 7 W
I.O n O.(y•.n M n ..N 7 n F n W n W I+ m^ I •
7 9 7 0 0 7 0 n n W < C n C 7 W I1 n n 9 C 0
1lB W 0 00 n n n C ....0,
I Or C • Oa 19 16 n
0•CO r o n 0 9 M n 0'n Y n W R W n m co re • n Y
C n O.0.n 0 Y W 0 W 0 9 1-W O Y ma n
B. . Y n n 10 n n gOg C O n • C i
II O W C 0 0 .MI 'S 0 r n V• W n M•C Imo•• O'
n nip a.• VO a O re C o n n
.n-_ 0
—_. _ _—.--....._ •0
Y...1p •
re fr
In
IC 0
V o
i I.. VD
0
10 n en% re
CO ' Itn
_.... . _._.. . .. .... •-----__-__J
Od< A]C (0
H
v v ~
11.
X De
% W ro Sf �t 0 i i
O 1 2
°$v1� c � C g s uo a n r'
.O•,Or"nn 0�" �.on n r a n
. n1. gQa 'n nT Ap A w
0.004•Ai A a eF O n a
m W a a 7 S C 8 C A i 1.4
'
nrn c ro n 0 e z n
e 0• .n n .1 e 7 n~ I W
IC D.6 06 n A o 2' ^ P. A
O•Vno n0 4 r •roi =
n.••.•S< n r 0 $ r. en
AAA A • k A zz ge4" • a .a r
• . i
o4o. 0 e
S r^ nna C
C0l00 N • y
00
A! i r
ft .4 a.
NMn Ia e n n a S x
.1 a a A a
• r 7 r
A a. I 0
11.
l p W a M 7. n a i e z: OM nn 0T A E 1, t,..).
A CmnF. n
O
C Pi9n O C Cn 0.S_B C as777 • ' 0 a .1 a bpp9 A n 7 0 o a < M to C n a 7 A • M A
O A n n...a < n n A n 1.A n aa .qPi r..A n C a 4• SW O 0 G. 'O
W < n.• a M nO A
00A (fWa7a CO no 7a ar
0 0 0 n0 I '..•a • a7 • OW C n 7 0 n .•••n a A M n
a 7 0 a
1...
r .. < ra 7 n n 6 a t 6 W n n
.y
a a n n c00 0 A .. 0 S w n w ..n
oan . .
c n C C. s 0 ..•n a *0 OC n [ r 4 O0- S n C 2 a a n 7 g 0 41 1n< Mr7 .• D.n 0 7 O•a0 1+4.
7 SMrWnAAn +7aYa C On• i 00 m4 nn9n.7 nn
4.
sr
i.
a 0 n 0 a O r I..O AO F nU
A 4pX 'cO n A .0 r9 .. ..a H
DappmAASOnApaG.6nr5
a .1a n7 oM W a Cn S go .m7 naA Sa a.. 0Ca nOA .
I A <
ar ...a ......a. am a 7O r ,AOn7 • 0 MMGay
7O' 77 Oa .n . 10 •
asgpp 2.4 M • 2•a672'7C0 . ro
S a n a n a. .n a F 7 N
rC0. 0700aSPcOn xr a no rO 'a .- • .'r••7 n n M
nr n S% na aSr•
~Ms am2.aA7a. a A'0 AnO 0.4 g
0.a n A QPp
H9n AO nnna•0a . O .- a
n 7 to < o an" .n
rg
4
4 IA pa
ii
A
Commission 2
MEMORANDUM
SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSION
TO: MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION
FROM: RALPH B. CAMPBELL, III, ADMINISTRATOR
SUBJECT: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF RATE INCREASE PROPOSAL
THURSDAY 11 AUGUST 1983
Attached is the financial Analysis of the Pending Rate Increase Proposal of
Minnesota Cablesystems-Southwest done by CTIC Associates as part of the Commission's
rate increase review process.
CTIC's conclusions (last page, copied in pink, of the Analysis) indicates:
1) Minnesota Cablesystems-Southwests' (MCS) rate increase "proposal is de-
tailed and its facts have been substantiated with audited statement";
2) "(T)he proposed increase ...will cause an increase of 17.6 percent* on
the average subscriber's bill of services"; and
3)"(T)he currently proposed rate increase is justifiable and merited"
( Although CTIC challenges some of MCS's claims, CTIC's bottom line is that the
increased rates are appropriate.
According to the Analysis, the primary goal of this rate increase appears to
be to reduce projected losses and minimize the need for debt capital.
Cablesystems has been losing money on their operations in the Southwest, but
these losses were expected. Cablesystems presumed a cumulative net loss would occur
at this point in time in its operations. CTIC points out that it is normal to ex-
perience no positive cash flow until the third of fourth years, and positive net
income left unrealized until the sixth or seventh year of operations (pages IV 1 & 2).
CTIC also points out that Cablesystems' local investors are earning returns through
tax savingsderived from allocation of system losses and investment tax credits (pages
IV 2 - 6).
CTIC's summary on page III - 12 highlights the overall revenue and expenses
picture pointing out the effects of the proposed rate increase.
Staff recommends that the Commission:
1) Encourage development of the interactive and institutional network
services to address CTIC's comments made in paragraph 2, page III-4;
2) Determine the reasons for the low income derived from sale of adver-
tising time (paragraph 3, page III-4);
3) Encourage CSW to take steps to reduce its relatively' high level of
bad debt expense (paragraph 2, page III-6);
4) Request an ennumeration of the services received from Minnesota
Cablesystems, Incorporated, in return for the 5% gross revenue
management fee (paragraph 3, page III-6); and,
5) Receive from CSW a report reprojecting future incomes, expenses,
•
and rate increases to address CT1C's comment in the last sentence of
paragraph 2, page V.
These items should not be made part of the rate increase process, but rather,
pursued after the process.
* Note should be taken that this represents an 8.8 percent per year increase when -
spread over the time from the date the system began serving subscribers, November.
1981, tO the projected date when the rate increase, if approved, takes affect,
November 1983.
•
•
•
Commission 3
I �
f \
I SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSION
REPORT ON TECHNICAL EVALUATION
IMINNESOTA CABLE SYSTEMS SOUTHWEST
I
V
•
I -
•
Cooper Associates, Inc.
June 8, 1983
•
-,
•
INTRODUCTION
Cooper Associates, Inc. (Cooper) was employed by the
Southwest Suburban Cable Commission (SWSCC) to provide technical
advisory services regarding the cable television system serving
the franchised area. These services encompassed a technical
evaluation of Minnesota Cable Systems Southwest, with regard to
their compliance with the franchise and Proposal that was
submitted to the Commission.
While there may exist areas of non-compliance relative to
the technical aspects of the Company's Proposal, the Commission
should be aware that viable alternatives may have been
implemented by the Company.
Our investigation included two and one-half days of field
work, which represents sufficient time to perform a general
technical audit.
Our evaluation is divided into two parts. The first part is
a point-by-point discussion of the RFP technical section and the
Company's Proposal noting whatever non-compliance items had
occurred to date. The Company advised us that they had prepared
a comprehensive report that has been submitted to the City, which
also outlined areas of non-compliance.
The second part of this report consists of an overall
evaluation of the system design consisting of an evaluation of
the Company's FCC Compliance testing.
1
SECTION I. EVALUATION OF TECHNICAL COMPLIANCE
Our analysis of the technical aspects of the franchise and
Company Proposal consisted of a review of all pertinent documents
and discussions with Company representatives. Through our
analysis the following discrepancies between the RFP response
• (Proposal) and the present physical condition of the cable system
were discovered.
A) There is presently no system interconnection between
the cable system and other surrounding cable systems. The
Company advised us that there will be no plans made for
interconnection until the Minnesota State Cable Board outlines
its preferences.
B) The Company is using Zenith addressable converters for
all of its subscribers instead of t•he Scientific Atlanta
converters as proposed.
C) There are no addressable taps in the system as proposed
in the RFP.
D) The Company is using Belden 9118 and 9119 RG-6 drop
cable rather than Amphenol as proposed.
E) The levels of service that do not require converters
have fewer than 200 subscribers. The remaining 26,000
subscribers all have converters.
F) The Company has installed three Scientific Atlanta TYRO
satellite receivers rather than two as proposed, and has
installed tunable satellite receivers rather than fixed.
2
G) The scrambling being utilized is the Zenith inverted
video suppressed sync design rather than the Scientific Atlanta
approach which is described in the Form I, Item 6 of the RFP
response.
R) The FM service is not trapped externally which may
account for the fact that there are only 195 FM subscribers out
of 26,000 cable subscribers. Any person splitting the incoming
cable signal to his FM system is able to obtain the FM service,
thereby saving $1.95 per month.
I) The Company actually installed a 60-foot tower instead
of a 100-foot tower as proposed to receive its off-air signals.
J) The off-air signals are processed at IF frequency only
•
and are not switchable as video signals.
( K) There is no security system presently installed
pursuant to paragraph 8 of the RFP response. The Company is
conducting some experiments elsewhere, but presently has no plans
for installing such security systems.
L) The cable amplifiers as installed presently do not have
upstream capability and, therefore, do not presently have status
monitoring as listed in paragraph 10 of the RFP response. The
Company plans to have status monitoring on the system within one
year.
M) The emergency alert system was tested by us. In
addition, there is a letter included in Appendix A showing actual
tests that have been done at various locations. The emergency
override does not override the FM channels.
3
N) The standby generator at the headend is fueled by
natural gas rather than a fuel tank as listed in paragraph 12 of
the RFP response.
0) The video character generator used by the Company is in
a non-standard television format and, therefore, cannot be
processed by a timebase corrector or a video processing amp.
p) There is no institutional network as listed in
paragraph 15 of the RFP response, and the Company presently has
no plans for installing an institutional network.
Q) The Company presently has two channels of common
carrier microwave, feeding it a weather and financial channel.
These channels will be replaced by a two-channel AML system.
R) All amplifiers in the hub interconnection trunks are
spaced at 300 MHz instead of 300 and 402 MHz as listed in
paragraph 16.A.2.
S) The headend is capable of having all of the channels
harmonically related, but currently this is not implemented as
shown in the headend diagram.
The two most important features of the point-by-point
determination with regard to the RFP was the fact that the system
in its present configuration has not been activated for any two-
way capability; including the status monitoring system, which
would be helpful for system maintenance. In addition, there has
been no construction of an institutional network. The Company
advised us that the City is, in fact, aware of both of these
items of non-compliance and that the City is comfortable with the
Cable Company's current position, which is that the Company will
4
comply with both of these items when it seems economically and
technologically appropriate. While we concur with the position
of both the City and Company, we are concerned with a 'trigger
mechanism• such as economic and/or technical feasibility, which
is difficult to define. We would suggest that the Company and
City attempt to arrive at a "trigger mechanism' that is more
finite.
The cable industry is about to experience intense
competition from the telephone industry with regard to two-way
interactive services. It, therefore, seems prudent for the
Company to maintain a •wait and see" attitude with regard to
these extra services, since it would be inappropriate to conduct
a mass experiment which would place a financial burden on the
existing subscribers.
The system uses Zenith converters •exclusively, which are
addressable. The Company appears to have done an excellent job
with regard to the installation and operation of these
converters. All converters are operated for a 24-hour period
prior to being installed, and the addresses are individually set
to minimize field errors and installation time. The Company said
it is experiencing failures in the order of 10 to 20 units per
day (other than catastrophic outages), which is well within the
predicted reliability of the converter.
The overall system appears to be in excellent condition,
reflecting the latest in proven available technology as well as
high level installation practices.
5
SECTION II. FCC COMPLIANCE TESTING & TECHNICAL EVALUATION
The Company had just performed its FCC compliance testing in
a fairly extensive report which is included as Appendix B to this
report. A review of the data shows the system to be well within
FCC requirements. Specific field measurements were verified by
us in an effort to verify the accuracy of the test procedures.
Three areas covered by us were: the composite triple beat
measurement, the carrier to noise measurement, and the error rate
for the Zenith converter. These are discussed separately in this
report.
The system consists of a central headend with two remote hub
locations which are fed from the headend. The supertrunk from
( the headend to the hub is accomplished by two separate trunks.
carrying the band from 300 to 450 MHz on one cable and 5 to 300
MHz on the other cable. At the hub location the signals are
diplexed* together to form the full spectrum signal, and launched
out in various directions from the hub. The purpose of this
approach was to minimize the channel loading from the headend to
the hub locations and, therefore, maintain a higher signal
quality at the end of the system. The techniques used entail
diplexing filters to combine the two supertrunk cables. This can
result in signal distortion, particularly differential phase at
channels near the cross-over point, which is approximately
channel 36.
*See Appendix C for further details
6
r ";
Cooper Associates did not measure the differential phase and
gain of channels located within the three channel slots above and
below the cross-over point, but Cooper Associates recommends that
such test be performed as part of the ongoing proof of
performance of the supertrunk system. The split system used has
the disadvantage that both trunks must be equalized and balanced
to maintain the common output level at the end point where they
are combined. Since the longest run in each trunk was 18
amplifiers, it amounts to really maintaining 36 amplifiers to
keep a common level output at the hub locations. Current
technology utilizes feed-forward amplifiers which can be operated
at higher output levels with lower composite triple beat for
supertrunk applications. These approaches were probably not
( available to the Company at the time of the design of the system,
and the discussion here is in no way intended to reflect poor
design on the part of the operator. Nevertheless, since there
are over 800 amplifiers in the system, it may well be worth
considering replacing the supertrunks with 36 feed-forward
amplifiers to reduce system maintenance and level problems. This
should be done in conjunction with the differential phase in gain
measurements discussed, as well as long term stability
measurements made at the combined output of the supertrunk
locations. The Company has its own performance test
documentation which far exceeds that required by the FCC.
Cooper Associates attempted several tests which were beyond
FCC scope in order to identify the level of system tolerance
between signal to noise and composite triple beat, so that actual
7
measurements could indicate a benchmark for future performance
and relative system degradation. With regard to composite triple
beat, the first tests performed were on a standard trunk
amplifier.
The composite triple beat test was measured using a spectrum
analyzer and two tones with one tone operating approximately 10
. dB below the other tone and at a spacing of 1.25 MHz frequency
separation. Both tones were raised to the operating level where
the 2 A-B intermodulation tone was 40 dB below the smaller tone.
The observed results were +72 dBmv for -40 dB CTB.
Attempts were made to correlate these measurements in a
field cascade of amplifers but the results were masked by the
launch amplifiers at the headend which were subsequently measured
( and found to have a +64 dBmv output capability at -40 dB CTB.
The following calculations demonstrate that the initial
launch amplifiers were contributing as much CTB to the system as
a 21-amplifier cascade.
Jerrold Amplifier:
Jerrold spec - 31.5 dBmv @ 54 channel for -88 dB CTB
+31.5 dBmv - Sys @ -88 dB CTB
+17 dB = 10 LOG N (N - 54 channels)
+24 dB - Syst @ 40 dB
+72.5 dBmv - 2 Tone -40 dB Theoretical Level
Measured -40 dB CTB Input Gain Output
Jerrold Trunk +48 dBmv 24 +72 dBmv
SA Launch Amp +44 dBmv 20 +64 dBmv
8
(1) CTB of SA Launch Amp
- 40 + 2 (64 - 35) - 20 LOG (54)
- 40 + 58 - 34
- 64 dB CTB
(2) CTB of 21 Amp Cascade
- 40 + 2 (72 - 30) - 20 LOG (54) - 20 (LOG)
(21 Amp)
40 + 84 - 34 - 26
40 + 50 - 26 - 64 dB CTB
Combined - 58 dB CTB
The levels of the launch amplifiers should be reduced by a
tinimum of 5 dB to correct this situation or if this is not
possible, they should be replaced by regular trunk amplifiers, as
( this will increase the operating tolerance of the system by at
least 3 dB.
There was insufficient time to make additional field tests,
but it would be very useful if the Company developed a two tone
measuring technique for measuring the composite triple beat so
that degradation in system performance can be measured as it
occurs.
The Company presently utilizes a spectrum analyzer to
indicate that the beats are "greater than" a certain level down
and this does indicate whether the system is 3 dB worse than any
measurements that were made previously.
In addition to composite triple beat, Cooper Associates
evaluated signal to noise measurements on the system. For FCC
9
proof of performance and customer satisfaction, these
measurements are made on an overall basis which includes
satellite reception noise, modulator noise and system noise.
From a system maintenance point of view, it is more important to
monitor the carrier to noise of the system alone since this
measurement in conjunction with composite triple beat determines
the "operating window" for the system. Measurements were made
using a 727 field strength meter with an 8 dB correction factor
on an unmodulated channel at approximately 243 MHz utilizing a
tunable pre-selector filter in front of the field strength meter.
The measurements showed a noise pedestal of -62 dB at the
headend which would be residual modulator noise and is within
Scientific Atlanta's modulator spec of -60 dB for noise pedestal.
( Measurements were made through a 21 amplifier cascade and
produced a result of -49 dB carrier to noise which is very close
to theoretically predicted value. This means that the particular
cascade under measurement was at its proper operating level.
Other tests were performed at the headend to determine the
noise immunity of the Zenith addressable system. A tunable
inband interfering carrier was injected into the test channel and
the addressability performed and decoding performance was
measured by addressing the converter on and off and by noting
whether or not the picture was being descrambled. The system
showed excellent noise immunity (noise here is used to include
composite triple beat or any interfering signal) under this test.
The converter could be addressed on and off in the presence of an
interfering carrier at any frequency 6 dB below the picture
10
carrier level which, incidentally, completely obliterated the
picture.
When the interfering carrier was reduced to 25 dB below
picture carrier level, the converter also performed well except
when the interfering signal was tuned to frequencies which were
spaced at multiples of 125 Raz from the picture character. At
these frequencies the converter would lose its decoding ability.
This may be an important result in determining whether or
not a harmonically related headend would help or hinder the data
transmission ability of the system. A computer analysis should
be done to determine what channels, if any, produce beats in
other channels in multiples of 125 RHz.
The Company advised us that other than catastrophic
( failures, they were experiencing 10 to 20 random disconnects per
day which is a reasonable number for a system with 26,000
converters. In most cases the converter is simply readdressed to
its previous state.
There has been very little work done in the industry to
measure error rate performance through a cable system for the
various methods of transmission. Until devices are developed
which perform these measurements, the cable system will continue
to operate "in the blind" with regard to this parameter.
The Zenith converter depends on a nickel-cadmium battery for
its memory retention and when this battery fails, the subscriber
loses his service level. It would be very useful to perform
accelerated life tests on this battery to determine if there will
be a problem in the future if the battery does not meet the
11
manufacturer's specifications of seven years. The end result
would be a high incidence of converter failure, which would
require replacement, when a simple change of the battery is all
that would be required.
•
•
12
sn
SECTION III. SUMMARY
The foregoing discussions and recommendations are of the
type that must be made when a true compliance audit is
accomplished. However, it is for the franchising body to decide
the materiality of the non-compliance items.
The only major variations, in our opinion, with the RFP are
the lack of an institutional network and the lack of two-way
services. As previously discussed, the two-way service
technology is so experimental and unproven that, in our opinion,
the public would be best served by not bearing the cost of any
experimental systems that might be tried.
With regard to the institutional network, that is a matter
between the municipality and the cable system operator. Again,
if there is not sufficient economic justification for an
institutional network, i.e. if it were not commercially self-
sustaining, the basic cable subscribers would have to bear the
economic burden for its operation.
The existing system is a modern state-of-the-art cable
television system. It is adequately staffed, maintained, and has
a full complement of test equipment. We would recommend that the
Company be requested to provide a brief narrative relative to its
position regarding the economic and technical feasibility of both
an institutional network and two-way cable. The Commission
should solicit input from subscribers, potential users, and its
members, so as to ascertain the public and governmental
13
perception of institutional and two-way services, so as to
facilitate movement towards acquiring these services for the
subscriber, if they are truly desired.
•
I '.
.
•
•
•
14
I �1
I
Commission 4
ANALYSIS OF THE PENDING
RATE INCREASE PROPOSAL
O8
MINNESOTA CABLESYSTENS-SOUTHWEST
August 9, 1983
•
it
PREPARED BY
CTIC ASSOCIATES
I800 North Kent Street
Suite 1001
Arlington, Virginia 22209
(703) 528-6838
•
ANALYSIS OF THE PENDING RATE
INCREASE OF MINNESOTA CABLESYSTEMS-SOUTHWEST
I. INTRODUCTION
CTIC Associates has been hired by the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission
to examine the rate increase request of Minnesota Cablesysteas-Southwest.
Minnesota Cablesystems-Southwest (hereinafter referred to as MCS) is seeking
rate increases for its Tier III basic service offering, its interactive service
offering, its Zenith converter rental fees, its installation charges, its FM:
service'rate, and additional outlet charges. These service charges are within
the rate regulatory authority of local government. MCS has also recently
increased the rates it charges for its pay service offerings.
Our analysis of the rate increase request focuses on MCS's financial
justification for these increases. We have reviewed Minnesota Cablesysteme-
Southwest Rate Adjustment Proposal dated June 24, 1983. In addition, we have
reviewed the original proposal of MCS to the city prior to the award of the
franchise in order to compare how original expectations match with actual
results.
MCS has provided a very detailed and thorough presentation to support its
rate increase request. We believe this presentation has provided sufficient
information upon which to base a financial analysis of its rate increase
request. The audited financial statements of the operator have been included
to support its figures.
1-2
Accordingly, in the Franchise Agreement (Section VI 4 (DI) there are 13
criteria for justifying a rate increase. Our analysis examines several of the
13 criteria (listed below according to their subsection in the franchise
agreement):
a) Ability to Render System Services and Derive a Reasonable Profit
• Therefrom Under Existing and Proposed Rate Schedules
b) Revenues and Profits Derived from System Services
c) Tax Benefits Received
d) Cash flow Derived from System Services
e) Original Cost of the System, Less Depreciation
f) A Fair Rate of Return with Respect to Investments Raving Similar
Risks to that of Providing Cable Communications Services
g) Capital Expenditures by Guarantee in Providing Updated Technology
and Services to Subscribers
As is well defined in the franchise agreement, a thorough evaluation of a
rate increase request examines not only financial considerations but also
addresses operator compliance with the terms of the ordinance (criteria i and
1), efficiency of the operator (criteria e), quality of service (criteria f)
and fairness of the increase to residents and subscribers (j). Our analysis
does not specifically address these criteria since they require examination of
areas which are most effectively and efficiently analyzed by the local au-
thorities.
This report is organized as follows: 1) Section II summarizes the op-
erator's rate increase request and justification for the increase; 2) Section
1
I-3
III review the financial performance of the operator in the principal rate-
gorier of revenues, expenses and capital expenditures and compares these.
results with original expectations; and, 3) Section IV examines system profit-
ability and how the rate increases will affect future financial performance.
I, .
II. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED RATE INCREASES AND
MINNESOTA CABLESYSTEMS-SOUTHWEST'S
JUSTIFICATION FOR THE RATE INCREASES
Table 1 summarizes the proposed rate increases and the percent increase
in the rates for the currently offered service.
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF RATE CHANCES
•
Current Proposed Percent
Service Rate Rate Change
Monthly Fees
Tier 1 - - No change
•
Tier 2 (Including converter) $ 5.45 $ 5.45 Ma change
Tier 3
a) Including set top con- $ 8.95 $10.50 17.3 percent
verter
b) Including remote con- $10.45 $12.00 14.8 percent
• verter
Tier 3 Interactive •
(Including converter) $10.95 $13.50 23.3 percent
FM $ 1.95 $ 2.50 28.2 percent
Installation Fees
Aerial drop $19.95 $24.95 25.1 percent
Underground drop $34.95 $39.95 14.3 percent
FM/Additional Outlet $10.00 $15.00 50.0 percent
II-2
TABLE 1 (Continued)
SUMMARY OP RATE CHANGES
Current Proposed Percent
Service Rate Rate Change
Converter (Monthly)
Oak Tier II $ 1.50 - No change
Set Top Tier III
with remote $ 3.00 $ 4.00 33.3 percent
Set Top Tier III $ 4.50 $ 5.50 22.2 percent
Enhanced Converter with lay
Lock and Remote $ 5.00 $ 6.00 20 percent
Additional Outlets
Tier II (including con-
verter) $ 3.45 $ 3.45 No change
Tier III (including set top
converter) $ 6.95 $ 8.95 28.8 percent
Change of service $14.95 $19.95 33.4 percent
Reconnect $14.95 $19.95 33.4 percent
•
MCS is proposing no change in the rates offered for its Tier 1 and Tier 2
service. Tier 1 will remain a no monthly charge service. The monthly charge
for Tier 2 remains at $3.95 per month plus a $1.50 charge for renting the Oak
converter. The Tier III basic service rate is proposed to increase from $5.95
per month to $6.50 per month or 9.2 percent. The Tier III converter rental
fees are targeted to increase from $3.00 per month to $4.00 per month or 33
percent for the set top converter; from $4.50 per month to $5.50 per month or
II-3
22 percent for the set top converter with remote control; and from $5.00 per
month to $6.00 per month or 20 percent for the enhanced converter with a
keylock and remote control.
Since all Tier III subscribers require a converter, the combined impact
of the monthly fee increase and converter rental fee increase for Tier III
subscribers is 17.3 percent for Tier III subscribers selecting the set top
model; 14.8 percent for Tier III subscribers selecting the covnerter with
remote control; and 14.2 percent increase for those Tier III subscribers
selecting the enhanced converter.
Currently 99 percent of all subscirbers select Tier III services. Of
those subscribers, 97 percent select the converter model with remote control.
As such, most subscribers will experience a basic service rate increase from
$10.45 per month to $12.00 per month or 14.8 percent.
MCS is also proposing a rate increase of 23.3 percent for the interactive
Tier III service. To date, this service is unavailable due to equipment dif-
ficulties MCS is having with the two-way amplifiers required for providing
this service.
MCS is proposing a 25.1 percent increase in aerial installation fees and
a 14.3 percent increase in underground installation fees. Currently 80
percent of plant has been aerial construction.'
MCS is proposing a 28.2 percent increase in the FM service monthly
charge; an increase from $1.95 per month to $2.50 per month. MCS has aot
provided any data on the number of subscribers who would be affected by this
proposed increase. Installation fees for FM service are proposed to increase
from $10.00 to $15.00.
•
II-4
Changes for additional outlets are proposed for Tier III only. The
monthly fee for the additional outlet of Tier III is $3.95 plus converter
charge. The new rate would be $4.95 plus converter charge. Subscribers
desiring an additional outlet of Tier III with the remote control converter
would be paying $10.45 instead of $8.45 or 23.7 percent more. Instead of
receiving a $2.00 per month discount off first set charges, these subscribers
would be receiving a $1.55 per month discount off of first set charges.
Currently approximately 13 percent of all subscribers appear to be selecting
an additional outlet of cable service. MCS does not indicate which level of
service subscribers select, but given the percentage of subscribers selecting
a first set of Tier III (99Z), it is reasonable to assume that most of these
additional outlet subscribers are on the Tier III level and most select the
( remote control covnerter. MCS has increased the installation fee for addi-
tional outlets from $10.00 to $15.00.
Finally, MCS proposed increases in change of service or upgrade charges
from $14.95 to $19.95 or 33.4 percent. Reconnect charges for subscribers who
have had service disconnected for some reason have increased from $14.95 to
$19.95 also.
In sum, the average subscriber (a Tier III subscriber with a remote
control converter) will see his or her basic monthly charge increase close to
15 percent, from $10.45 per month to $12.00 per month in addition to any
premium pay option selected. Premium pay options have recently increased in
coat from $7.50 per month to $8.95 per month. (The Disney Channel and Spec-
trum Sports Channel are slightly higher).
II-S
Currently the average basic subscirber selects 1.80 pay services. In
other words for every basic subscirber there is 1.80 pay services selected.
An effective way of examining the impact of the proposed rate increases is
to approximate a monthly subscriber bill representing the average subscriber
expenditure.
Before After
Increase Increase
Basic Service Charge
(Tier III with remote
converter) $10.45 $12.00
Pay Service Option 7.50 X 1.80• 13.50 8.95 X 1.80 • 16.11
• Additional Outlet
(Tier III with remote
converter) 8.45 X .13 - 1.10 10.45 X .13 • 1.36
TOTAL $25.05 $29.47
As such, including the recent pay increase and proposed basic rate
increases, the average subscriber can be estimated to expect a 17.6 percent
increase in average monthly fees for services purchased.
MCS's justification for the proposed rate increase focuses primarily on
the following points:
1) Higher converter costs
2) Higher interest rates
3) More mileage than was originally expected
4) Lower market penetration rates
5) Increase in hardware and labor costs.
These factors will be further addressed in the next section of this report.
II-b
All of these factors combined have led to a position where cumulative
losses at the end of fiscal 1983 are projected to be $4.4 million (with or
without the rate increase). MCS also indicates that in order to fund construc-
tion, approximately $3.34 million in additional partnership equity capital was
invested over the level of equity capital originally planned. MCS states that
• the rate increase proposed will result in a $260,000 decline in projected
losses for 1984 and a $530,000 decline in projected losses for 1985. MCS's
projections show no expectations of profit over the next five years. The
primary goal of the rate increase request appears to be to reduce projected
losses and minimise the need for debt capital.
•
•
III. FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE
In this section we will compare how the actual and currently expected
financial performance of the company compares with the original projections
provided in its proposal prior to the award of the franchise.
For the purposes of this analysis. we are assuming that the first year of
MCS projections in its original proposal coincides with fiscal 1981. We are
aware that there may be some descrepancies in terms of months covered in the
first year of the projections. However, we do believe that the comparison is
a useful tool. I
A. REVENUES AND SUBSCRIBERSHIP
Table 1 presents a comparison of actual and currently projected levels of
subscribership with originally forecasted levels of subscribership.
In its original forecast, MCS assumed that revenues would be achieved
during the first year of operation. In fact, while system construction began
in early 1981, the first subscriber was not served until December of 1981,
part of fiscal 1982. The level of basic service subscribership expected for .
1983 is about 5 percent higher than originally forecasted. However, this
represents a lower overall penetration rate since the number of households
passed by cable is greater than originally estimated. More notable is MCS
more conservative attitude toward future subscriber growth. MCS expects a
15 percent growth in subscribership between 1983 and 1984 compared with a 28
III-2
percent increase originally forecasted. An eight percent increase in sub-
scribership is now forecast between 1984 and 1985 compared with an 12 percent
increase originally forecast. MCS comments in its presentation that inability
to gain access to a large number of apartment buildings is a major reason for
these lower subscriber expectations.
Pay subscription has proven to be much higher than originally forecasted
by HCS. In its original projections, MCS assumed the average subscriber would
select 1.19 pay services. Actual results show that the average subscriber is
selecting close to two pay services each. Levels of pay units purchase are
close to 57 percent higher than originally forecast for 1983.
TABLE 1
SUBSCRIBERSBIP
Current Results and
Revised Projections Original Forecasts
1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985
1) Basic Subscribers - 13434 26360 30300 32826 2908 12938 25206 32221 36023
2) Basic Penetration - 42 45 50 52 40 45 50 55 60
3) Pay Service Units - 28891 46979 53454 58500 3461 15389 29969 38334 42877
4) Pay Service to Basic
Subscriber Ratio - 2.15 1.78 1.76 1.78 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19
Table 2 presents comparison of actual and currently project levels of
revenue with originally forecasted levels of revenue.
MCS original projections assumed basic service rate increases equal to 5
percent per year in 1984 and 1985.
•
III-3
Despite the less optimistic subscriber forecasts for 1984 and 1985. total
revenues forecasted (with or without the proposed rate increases) are actually
higher. MCS earned no revenue in 1981 compared with its original estimate
$427.000. In addition, revenues earned in 1982 are less than half of what
was originally forecasted for 1982. This is because fiscal 1982 was the first
year of actual marketing and subscribership. However, beginning in 1983 the
revenue outlook is higher than originally forecasted. Fiscal 1983 revenues
are expected to be 9 percent higher than originally assumed. Without the pro—
jected rate increase. 1984 revenues are expected to be 29 percent higher than
originally forecasted and 1985 revenues are now forecasted to be 24 percent
higher than originally estimated. With the increase, projected revenues would
be 33 percent and 30 percent higher for 1984 and 1985 respectively.
TABLE 2
REVENUES $000s
Current Results and
Revised Projections Original Forecasts
1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985
1) Basic Subscribers
(including add'1
outlet and conver—
ter rental) — 562 2923 3912a 4282a 153 1370 2668 3585 4205
4208b 4857b 3407 3784
2) Pay Service — 864 3528 6275 7243 138 1330 2591 3480 4087
3) Installation — 45 64 207a 225a 78 209 215 281 320
221b 256b
4) Other — 14 20 20 20 29 222 516 736 909
TOTAL — 1485 6535 10415a 11770* 427* 3131 5990 8087 9521
10724b 12376b
a. Without increase
b. With increase
*Total presented in the original proposal do not match sus of individual items
for year 1.
III-4
The reasons for these higher levels of revenues can be partially at—
tributed to the fact that 99 percent of subscribers are selecting the top tier
of basic service. Original projections showed only 75 percent of subscribers
at the top tier of service. Average monthly basic service revenue per sub—
scriber was $9.24 in 1983. Original forecasts showed a monthly basic revenue
• of $8.82. In addition the higher level of pay service subscription results in
pay service revenues for 1983 which are 36 percent higher than originally
forecasted. Total projected pay service revenues for 1984 and 1985 are 79
percent higher than originally estimated.
Certain categories of revenues have fallen below original expectations.
Revenues from installations are considerably lower than originally estimated,
especially over the first few years of operation. Part of this lower level of
revenue may be attributable to the fact that HCS has offered longer free
installation periods to subscribers in new service areas; from the originally
estimated 30 days to 60 and even 120 days. In addition, in its original
proposal, HCS assumed substantial revenue from interactive servcices and
institutional network services. Since neither interactive or institutional
network services are available, no revenue is derived therefrom. In its
original proposal, HCS assumed $482,200 in average annual revenues from those
services over the first five years.
Currently HCS projects only $20 thousand per year from other sources. We
are somewhat surprised that HCS is not earning more income from the sale of
advertising time not only on the locally originated channels but from "spots"
available on some of the satellite services such as ESPN. We would expect to
see HCS earning at least $60 thousand per year from this source.
•
•
III-5
Cumulative revenues through 1985 would total $30.2 million without the
rate increase and $31.1 million with the rate increase. Cumulative revenue as
original forecast through 1985 was $27.2 million. In terms of total revenue.
KCS is in a better position over the next few years than originally forecasted
• even without the rate increase. However. over the first two years of opera-
' tion (1981 and 1982) total revenue was considerably below expectations. The
proposed rate increase would yield an additional $900 thousand in revenues for
KCS over the next two years.
B. OPERATING EXPENSES
The following cable shows how operating expenses compare with original
forecasts for 1983 and 1985:
$000's
Current Original
Projections Forecasts
1983 1984 1983 1984
Plant 1494 1845 804 1199
Programming 2077 4317 1831 2704
GS6A 2397 3264 1472 2126
TOTAL 5968 9426 4107 6029
MCS's rate proposal does not provide much explanation as to why operating
expenses are so much higher than originally forecasted. Examining their break-
out of operating expenses reveals higher costs in most every category. Two
•
III-6
principal causes for the higher costs can be related to pay cable expense
and higher salary expense. In addition MCS is maintaining 745 miles of plant
compared to the 690 miles originally estimated.
In !ICS's 1983 budget, salaries constitute the largest expense by far. In
1983, MCS expects to pay $2.4 million for salaries and personnel related ex-
• penses. Overall, MCS's expenses appear similar to industry averages for new
systems and reflect substantial support for local programming. MCS does re-
port a fairly high level of bad debt expense for 1983, at close to 3 percent
of total revenues. Typically bad debt expenses averages between 1 and 2
percent of total revenues.
Five percent of gross revenues goes to Minnesota Cablesystems, Inc., the
general partner as a management fee. In 1983, this amount will equal $355
4. thousand.
The following table companies the originally forecasted operating margin
(revenue less expenses) with the currently forecasted operating margins for
1981 through 1985.
Currently Originally
Forecasted Forecasted
1981 - (1360)
1982 (303) (106)
1983 567 1329
1984 2141a/2404b 2415
1985 2417a/2950b 3026
Cumulative 4822a/5618b 5304
a. Without rate increase
b. With rate increase
III-7
In its original forecasts, MCS did expect negative operating income over
the first two years of operation. In addition, MCS did not expect to be in a
position of positive cumulative operating income until 1984. By the end of
1983, MCS will be in a position of positive cumulative operating income. By
the end of 1985, cumulative operating Income without the increase would be 10
. percent below original forcasts and with the increase would be about 6 percent
higher than the original forecasts.
C. CAPITAL EXPENDITURE
One of the principal justifications used by MCS for its proposed rate
increase is higher capital costs. At the end of 1982. MCS had invested $18
million to construct the system. Mother $5 million is planned for 1983 for a
total of $23 million. Original forecasts showed cumulative capital expen—
diture at the end of the third year at $18.6 million. MCS states that by the
end of fiscal 1985, a total of $27.6 million will be invested. The original
forecast for the first five years estimated $20.1 million.
These higher costs can be attributed to:
1) More plant miles than were originally forecasted;
2) higher per mile construction costs;
3) higher converter costs; and •
4) design changes.
MCS's original proposal assumed 690 miles of plant of which 624 miles
would be aerial plant and 66 miles would be underground construction. MCS
I
I11-8
states that during construction, it was discovered that there were actually
more miles to be built than was originally indicated in the instructions to
the applicants. By the end of fiscal 1983, MCS will have constructed 595
miles of aerial plant and 150 miles of underground plant for a total of 745
miles. While aerial mileage is actually lees than forecasted, underground
• plant is much more expensive to build than aerial plant - often 2 to 3 times
more expensive. The average costs per mile of plant in the orignal proposal
was estimated to be around $13,000. To date, the average per mile cost of new
plant construction in the MCS system has been $17,830, close to 39 percent
higher. In addition, MCS plans to construct another 50 miles of plant over
the next two years, thirty of which would be underground plant.
Mother principal cause for higher costa has been related to converters.
In its original proposal, MCS had planned to use the Scientific Atlanta
Descrambler-Converter with an estimated $70 per unit cost. Because the
Scientific Atlanta Converter was not available at the time of construction,
MCS decided to use the Zenith Z-TAC addressable converter which costs around
$150 per unit. The Z-TAC unit is highly regarded for its reliability and is
one of the most popularly proposed converters in recent franchising efforts.
As MCS states, it could have chosen a lees expensive, less sophisticated
model. However, the Z-TAC does allow for many operator benefits in terms of
tier security and reducing the risk of signal theft. The decision to use the
Z-TAC has meant an additional $3.1 million in capital spending. Because
almost all subscribers require the Z-TAC since they select Tier III, MCS is
III-9
investing more on converters for the top tier of service than was originally
estimated.
Because of the decision to use Z-TACK additional capital was required
to upgrade the headend equipment to use Zenith suppression equipment rather
than Scientific Atlanta equipment.
• TICS states that higher headend cost can also be attributed to the addi-
tion of one earth station above the original plan of 2 earth stations. This
allows for greater diversity of satellite signal choice.
All of these factors combined have resulted in much higher capital
investment than was originally planned. We believe NCS has provided ample
support for the concept that this added cost was necessary and beneficial to
the system and its subscribers.
D. FINANCING PLAN AND RELATED COSTS
There has been substantial changes in NCS financing plan. These changes
can be best summarised in the following table.
$000's
Original Proposal Actual & Projected
Equity Debt Equity Debt
1981 4982 5100 4990 -
1982 374 9400 4010 9500
1983 (180) 2800 - 6000
1984 254 400 - 1500
1985 230 300 - 1000
TOTAL 5660 18000 9000 18000
•
III-10
MCS has arranged long-term financing with two banks for the amount of $18
million. Its original plan was to draw down most of this financing over the
first two years. Since HCS's financing costs are tied to the prime rate, the
decision to delay draw down until year 2 was probably based on the high
interest rates experienced in 1981 and most of 1982. Instead of using the
debt capital in 1981 and most of 1982, MCS chose to make a substantial
additional equity investment in 1982. Originally, the partnership planned to
invest $4.982.000 in 1981 and an additional $678.000 over the next four years.
Instead, the partnership invested $4,990.000 in 1981 and another $4,010,000 in
1982. No additional equity capital investment is planned in the near future.
In 1982. MCS borrowed $9.5 million against the line of credit. An addi-
tional $6 million is scheduled for 1983. An additional $1.5 million will be
borrowed in 1984 and $1.0 million additional debt is scheduled for 1985. The
total amount of debt financing planned ($18 million) is the same as originally
scheduled. An additional $3.34 million in equity capital has been made.
As of August 31, 1982, the capital contributions of the partners have
been as follows:
Minnesota Cableaystems. Inc. - $7.302,500 - 811
Limited Partners - 1,697.500 - 191
Due to the purchase of certain limited partner shares in 1982, Minnesota
Cablesysteme, Inc. now hold 82.181 interest in the limited partnership.
According to the partnership agreement, losses, profits and tax benefits are
distributed between the general and limited partner according to the percent
III-11
of interest held by each. As of August 31, 1982, Minnesota Cablesystems. Inc.
had been allocated $4,114,849 in taxable losses and $1,221,679 in investment
tax credits. The limited partners have been allocated $1,041,229 in taxable
losses and $307,413 in investment tax credits.
Interest expense associated with the debt capital began to accrue in
1982. Total interest in 1982 was $772,605 of which $491,993 wee capitalized.
Interest expense for 1983 is projected to be $2.083 million, averaging approxi—
mately 13.4 percent on the outstanding debt of $15.5 million for 1983. Pro-
jected interest expense for 1984 is $2.415 million, average 14.2 percent of
outstanding debt (projected at $17 million). Interest expense for 1985 is
• projected to be $2.307 million or about 13 percent.
Interest expense is obviously difficult to predict given the substantial
fluctuations in the prime rate over the past few years. Over the past year,
MCS should not have paid much more than 12.5 percent on its outstanding
balances. Assuming the prime rate does not flucuate much above 11.5 percent
(it is currently at 11 percent) MCS should not be paying higher interest cost
than it originally forecasted. In fact, MCS has not to date paid as much
interest as it originally estimated. Projected levels of interest expense are
only slightly above levels originally forecasted.
Principal repayment on debt capital is projected to begin in 1986. Prin—
cipal repayments amount to $1,000,000 in 1986; $1,500,000 in 1987; $2,000.000
in 1988; $3,000,000 in 1989; $5,000,000 in 1990; and, $5,500.000 in 1991.
Assuming the interest rate does not increase substantially over the next
few years, interest expense should begin to decline in 1986.
III-12
E. SUMMARY
•
Current levels of total revenue and forecasted levels of revenue with or
without the rate increase compare favorably with original estimates. This is
inspite of less optimistic expectations for subscriber growth in the near
• future. Revenues have been higher than originally forecasted because a
greater percentage of the subscriber base selects the most expensive tier
option and because more pay services are being purchased than originally
estimated.
Operating expenses are substantially higher than originally estimated.
This can probably be attributed to a combination of larger plant size, infla—
tion, higher pay cable expenses and original underestimation of personnel
costs.
The combination of somewhat higher revenues and substantially higher
operating expenses has meant that operating income over the first three
years of operation is low.
However, original forecasts show a cumulative negative operating income
at the end of 1983. Current results show a postive operating income. Fore—
casts for operating income over 1984 and 1985 would be below original fore—
casts without the rate increase and slightly above original forecasts with the
increase.
Higher capital costs are a principal justification for the rate increase.
By the end of 1983. MCS will have invested $4.4 million more than it originally
planned. By the end of 1985, MCS will be $7.5 million over the projected in—
vestment. The higher capital costs have been substantiated by MCS as neces—
sary and beneficial to subscribers and are primarily atributable to more plant
•
•
•
•
III-13
ailes than originally estimated, higher construction costs. higher converter
costs, and necessary design changes.
The additional capital costs have required a higher level of equity •
capital investment. Originally the partners planned to invest $5.660 million.
•
To date $9 million has been invested. The amount of debt financing has not
been changed; it remains projected at $18 million. However, NCS had delayed
drawing down its debt capital until 1982, saving considerable interest expense
in 1981 and 1982. Total interest expense paid to date is less than origi-
nally estimated. Assuming the prime rate does not fluctuate much higher than
11.5 percent over the next few years, interest expense should remain similar
'to levels originally forecasted.
Overall, the rate increase will improve cash flow by around $900,000 over •
the next two years and assist the operation in beginning debt service scheduled
for 1986.
IV. SYSTEM PROFITABILITY
The following table compares net income with and without the rate in—
crease and with the original projections.
NET INCOME
$000's
Actual & Projected
With Without
Increase Increase Original Proposal
1981 — — (2161)
1982 (1056) (1056) (2692)
1983 (3391) (3391) (2690)
1984 (2049) (2395) (1856)
1985 (1516) (2132) (1350)
Cumulative (8012) (8974) (10749)
The MCS operation reports no loss for 1981 because it incurred no reve—
nues and all expense were capitalized. As is evidenced, MCS expected to be
operating with a cumulative net loss at this point in time in its operation.
While this position appears very critical, in fact it is the "norm" for cable
operations. Most cable system experience substantial losses in early years.
Positive cash flow is usually not experience until the third or fourth year of
operation and postive net income may not be experienced until the sixth or
seventh year. These situations are not completely remedied by rate increase
since system profitability is as much &function of reaching a mature level of
IV-2
subscriber participation and completion of construction expense as rates
charged. In addition, because of large debt requirements, interest expense in
the early years is often the largest expense item. As debt capital is repaid,
system profitability should greatly improve.
This system should achieve postive cashflow with or without a rate
' increase by 1985. The rate increase would definitely improve the cashflow
situation and perhaps hasten repayment of long-term debt therefore lowering
interest costs.
Because MCS is a limited partnership, system profitability should not be
measured simply as positive net income. A cable television system offers its
investors substantial tax savings through allocation of system losses and
investment tax credits. Even though the system is operating at a substantial
loss, its investors are earning a return through tax benefits.
On page 71 (Schedule 8) of its rate increase proposal, MCS provides the
tax implications to its limited partners and provides a calculation of return
on investment. We believe this presentation is misleading in that it does not
assume the value of the limited partnership interest itself and measures only
the net cash gain over the original investment.
Any internal rate of return calculation of this type must assume a value
of the asset at the end of the cashflow period'. For the sake of this example
we assume that the limited partners will sell their interest at the end of the
fifth year. We use a conservative market valuation of $800 per subscirber
less outstanding indebtedness. Many systems are sold for as much as $1000 per
subscriber. An $800 per subscriber valuation would result in a market value
IV-3
•
of $26 million. Removing outstanding indebtedness, which would be $18 mil—
lion in debt at the end of 1985, would leave a valuation of $8 million. The •
general partners value would be $6.576 million and the limited partners
valuation would be $1.424 million. The internal rate of return calculation,
assuming a 50 percent tax rate and full utilization, for both the no rate
increase and rate increase assumptions would be as follows:
Limited Partner
Cash Plow and Internal
Rate of Return
$000'.
(61)
Cash Flow Present Value
No Rate Adjustment
Investment 1604 1604
( 1981 Tax Savings (201) 63 59
1982 Tax Savings 765 681
1983 Tax Savings 377 317
1984 Tax Savings 252 200
1985 Tax Savings 198 148
Market Value (1986) 1424 982
Internal Rate of Return 10.61
(61)
Cash Flow Present Value
Rate Adjustment
Investment 1604 1604
1981 Tax Savings (201) 63 59
1982 Tax Savings 765 681
1983 Tax Savings 377 317
IV-4
Limited Partner
Cash Flow and Internal
Rate of Return
$000's (Continued)
(6Z)
Cash Flow Present Value
Rate Adjustment (Continued)
1984 Tax Savings 229 181
1985 Tax Savings 151 113
Market Value 1424 982
Internal Rate of Return 10.OZ
As is evidenced, the limited partners return on investment would average
around 10 to 11 percent over the five year period assuming they sold their
interest at a very conservative valuation. A $1000 per subscriber valuation
less outstanding indebtedness given the same cash flow projections would yield
limited partner investors an 18.6 percent internal rate of return over the
same period.
The rate of return to the general partner can also be estimated using
this approach. However, MCS has indicated that the general.partner'v parent
company, Rogers Cablesystems, Inc., cannot presently utilize the tax savings
flowing from the MCS system for several years because it has several cable
systems under construction and also operating at a loss. Since we have not
reviewed the operating information on the other Roger's operations we cannot
estimate when these tax savings could be utilized. Of course, these is a firm
limit on how long a company can hold onto these tax savings. Unused invest-
ment tax credits can be carried forward,for 15 years. Unused taxable losses
Iv-5
can be carried forward for seven years. If the general partner were able to
use all tax savings in 1986, given the same assumptions concerning market
valuation at $800 per subscriber, it would acheive an internal rate of return
as follows:
General Partner
• Cash Flow and Internal
Rate of Return
$000's
(62) Tax Savings
Cash Flow Present Value Used
No Rate Adjustment
Investment
7398 7398
1981 Tax Savings (20%) 252 237
1982 Tax Savings 3060 2723
1983 Tax Savings 1508 1267
1984 Tax Savings 1008 '798
1985 Tax Savings 792 562
1986 Present Value of 4585
Accumulated Tax Benefits
Discounted Market Value 4415
of Interest in Partnership
9000
Total Cash Flow
3.3x
Internal Rate of Return •
As is evidenced, the inability of the parent company to use the tax
savings for several years seriously diminishes the rate of return to that
partner.
Mother profitability measure used is return on net investment. This
relates return to both debt and equity capital to the value of assets they
created. It relates net income plus interest (the return of debt capital)
IV-6
to the book value of assets. Without the rate increase, the MCS operation
shows a negative rate of return of (9Z) on fixed assets between 1982 and 1985.
With the rate increase, an average rate of return on fixed assets is negative
(52).
It will take several years for this system to achieve a positive and
' reasonable rate of return on fixed assets.
Overall, we can conclude that the system offers profitability at this
time only to the limited partners who can fully benefit from the tax savings
of the losses and investment tax credits. The proposed rate increase will not
immediately have any substantial effect on system profitability. The princi- �- -
pal benefit of the rate increase will be to hasten positive cash flow in order
to ensure that debt service or principal repayment can begin on schedule in
ram:
1986.
}
V. CONCLUSIONS
Overall, we believe MCS has presented a strong argument for the proposed
rate increase. Its proposal is detailed and its facts have been substantiated
• with audited statements.
We estimate that the proposed increase (outlined in Section II) will
cause an increase of 17.6 percent on the average subscriber's bill of ser-
vices. This may appear contrary to MCS's claim of 9 percent. However. MCS
considered only the 55 cent increase in Tier III charges in that percentage.
In its proposal. MCS alludes to the need for another rate increase in the near •
•
•
future (see page 46 of proposal). We do question whether subscribers will
accept two such substantial rate increase in close proximity.
We believe the currently proposed rate increase is justifiable and
merited. It will not bring net income up to a positive level but should help
diminish the current working capital deficiency and allow the company to more
comfortably begin debt service scheduled for 1986. The level of earnings
currently experience is not substantially worse than originally forcasted.
However, because of the larger capital investment, the revenue requirement
needs to be higher for any given level of return to be achieved. Only the
limited partners appear to be achieving a positive return due to their ability
to utilize the tax benefits from operational losses and investment tax credits.
•
•
SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSION
RATE INCREASE RECOMMENDATIONS
PERCENT RECOMMENDED
MONTHLY FEE PRESENT PROPOSED INCREASE RATE
Tier I Free Same 0% Free
Tier II $ 3.95* Same* 0% $ 3.95
Tier III 5.95* $ 6.50* 9% 6.50
Tier III Interactive 10.95** 13.50** 23% 13.50
F.M. 1.95 2.50 28% 2.50
INSTALLATION FEE
Aerial $19.95 $24.95 25% $ 24.95
Underground 34.95 39.95 14% 39.95
F.M. or Additional Outlets 10.00 15.00 50% 15.00
CONVERTER
Oak Converter; for Tier II $ 1.50 Same 0% $ 1.50
Set top converter 3.00 4.00 33% 4.00
Converter with Remote Control,
remote volume 4.50 5.50 22% 5.50 _
Enhanced Converter with keylock
rental Control, Mute, and
'.avorite Channel and Remote Unit 5.00 6.00 20% $ 6.00
ADDITIONAL OUTLETS
Tier II $ 1.95* Same* 0% $ 1.95
Tier III 3.95* 4.95* 25% 4.95
Change of Service (Upgrade) 14.95 19.95 33% 19.95
Reconnect Charge 14.95 19.95 33% 19.95
PERCENT
PREMIUM SERVICES (Not Regulated) ORIGINAL PRESENT INCREASE
HBO $ 7.50 $ 8.95 19% N.R.
Cinemax 7.50 8.95 19% N.R.
Showtime 7.50 8.95 19% N.R.
The Movie Channel 7.50 8.95 19% N.R.
Bravo 7.50 8.95 19% N.R.
Home Theater Network 3.95 N.A. - N.R.
The Entertainment Channel N.P. N.A. - N.R.
The Disney Channel N.P. 8.95 - N.R.
Spectrum Sports N.P. 9.95 - N.R.
Premier 7.50 N.A. - N.R.
HTN plus N.P. 8.95 - N.R.
* Plus Converter
** Including Converter
N.P. Not in original franchise proposal
N.A. Not available now, deleted from program offering
N.R. Not Regulated